[PATCH 06/17] Document the linux,network-index property.
Segher Boessenkool
segher at kernel.crashing.org
Sat Mar 24 03:42:14 EST 2007
>>> Segher, what is the the 'other alias' mechanism you are referring
>>> to that should be dropped? Is it this proposed linux,network-index
>>> property? or something else?
>>
>> Just the
>>
>> pic0: pic at 700 {
>> ...
>> }
>>
>> labeling thing -- it becomes redundant when the flat tree
>> stuff would support OF-style aliases, so it can be phased
>> out then.
>
> How? You still need integer-encoded phandles, as that's how various
> properties are defined.
Of course. But DTC could derive them automatically.
> Why should every node that needs a phandle
> reference have to go in /aliases?
They don't. They don't need a label now, either. It's just
handy for many/most things to go in /aliases.
> They seem to be solving two different
> problems to me.
Yeah, one a superset of the other. Except for labels
on / into properties as David mentioned, which is a
flat-tree specific solution for a flat-tree specific
problem.
> As for using aliases for network indices, it could be done, but it'd be
> more complicated to implement due to string manipulation.
It's more complex because it's more flexible, yes. I think
it'll pay off -- and how complex is using a sprintf() really.
Segher
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list