I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to do here, but it doesn't look right to me.
In particular, why would I have to have a separate core for these functions?
Furthermore, I'm sure there must be some generic mechanisms that can/should be used for these kind of things.
In general, we shouldn't reinvent the wheel here..

CC'ing devicetree-discuss-mnsaURCQ41sdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, which is really the best place to ask such questions.

Steve

-----Original Message-----
From: Michal Simek [mailto:michal.simek-g5w7nrANp4BDPfheJLI6IQ@public.gmane.org]
Sent: Tue 6/30/2009 4:18 AM
To: John Williams; John Linn; David DeBonis; Stephen Neuendorffer
Subject: Device tree BSP

Hi all,

I need to talk to you about names for at least one new compatible
property name.
It is for heartbeat led gpio and (not important now) reset gpio.
Currently linux kernel takes
first gpio for heartbeat led which needn't be led gpio that's why we
need to specify which gpio
node is for it. I think we can't used it aliases because in case you
enable gpio linux driver
heartbeat go away because that node had gpio compatible property.

Our proposed compatible names are xlnx,heartbeat-gpio-1.00.a and
xlnx,reset-gpio-1.00.a
which replaced all gpio compatible properties. Below are two parts of
fragments.

LEDs_8Bit: gpio@42000000 {
    compatible = "xlnx,heartbeat-gpio-1.00.a";
    reg = < 0x42000000 0x10000 >;
    xlnx,all-inputs = <0x0>;

Push_Buttons: gpio@42600000 {
    compatible = "xlnx,reset-gpio-1.00.a";
    interrupt-parent = <&xps_intc_0>;
    interrupts = < 4 2 >;

If you agree with heartbeat name, I will change it in linux kernel code.

Thanks,
Michal

--
Michal Simek, Ing. (M.Eng)
PetaLogix - Linux Solutions for a Reconfigurable World
w: www.petalogix.com p: +61-7-30090663,+42-0-721842854 f: +61-7-30090663