From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <avorontsov@ru.mvista.com>
Received: from buildserver.ru.mvista.com (unknown [213.79.90.228])
	by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58541DDDF3
	for <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>; Thu, 19 Mar 2009 07:39:30 +1100 (EST)
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 23:39:28 +0300
From: Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@ru.mvista.com>
To: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] powerpc/85xx: Move gianfar mdio nodes under the
	ethernet nodes
Message-ID: <20090318203928.GA16381@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru>
References: <20090318195911.GA31525@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru>
	<20090318200039.GC8182@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru>
	<49C1541F.8040803@freescale.com>
	<20090318202344.GA9708@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru>
	<20090318202947.GA14504@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru>
	<49C15A21.3050002@freescale.com>
	<20090318203327.GA15378@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru>
	<49C15AFF.3050708@freescale.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf8
In-Reply-To: <49C15AFF.3050708@freescale.com>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Li Yang <leoli@freescale.com>
Reply-To: avorontsov@ru.mvista.com
List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List <linuxppc-dev.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://ozlabs.org/mailman/options/linuxppc-dev>,
	<mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
	<mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>

On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 03:35:11PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
> Anton Vorontsov wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 03:31:29PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote:
>>> Anton Vorontsov wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 11:23:44PM +0300, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
>>>>> I don't see any better solution, should I just leave the core1's
>>>>> mdio node intact?
>>>> Ah. We also could change compatible entry to "fsl,gianfar-slave".
>>>> This will prevent gianfar MAC driver to probe on core1.
>>> ...and also prevent it from probing the children, unless simple-bus 
>>> is  specified, or Linux is given special knowledge of the   
>>> "fsl,gianfar-slave" name.
>>
>> Yup. Do you see any problem with this?
>
> Yes, the mdio node would not get probed.  Why put it in the device tree  
> at all then?

I mean do you see any problem with giving Linux knowledge of
the -slave name?

p.s.

Actually, we can stay with status = ".." property, and if
things ever change, it's always driver's duty to check for
of_device_is_available(), and so the driver can simply check
for
if (!strcmp(status, "disabled on core"))
	probe_children_only().

-- 
Anton Vorontsov
email: cbouatmailru@gmail.com
irc://irc.freenode.net/bd2