From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Grant Likely Subject: Re: [PATCH] Implements new features for updating existing device tree nodes. Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2010 12:32:17 -0600 Message-ID: <20101016183217.GA3774@angua.secretlab.ca> References: <20101016010732.4855.52273.stgit@riker> <1287199277.4535.1423.camel@riker> <20101016064744.GD5036@yookeroo> <20101016081012.GH653@angua.secretlab.ca> <1287236747.4535.1424.camel@riker> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1287236747.4535.1424.camel@riker> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org Errors-To: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org To: John Bonesio Cc: devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 06:45:47AM -0700, John Bonesio wrote: > On Sat, 2010-10-16 at 02:10 -0600, Grant Likely wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 05:47:44PM +1100, David Gibson wrote: > > > On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 08:21:17PM -0700, John Bonesio wrote: > > > > Ok, so maybe I misunderstood. I thought we had decided that node > > > > modifications would only happen at the top level, but now that I'm > > > > looking back through your examples earlier today, and I see this isn't > > > > true. > > > > > > Um.. that part of the discussion got confusing. I think only allowing > > > the operations (and I still don't think the set implemented here are > > > quite right, though they're close) at the top-level is a better idea. > > > > > > Grant, is there a reason you think we need to have replacement as an > > > option within each tree, rather than a "per-overlay-sheet" option. > > > > Yes, because I need the ability to remove/replace a child of a > > labelled node. Not every node that needs to be manipulated will > > necessarily have a label. > > > > For example; I could have a labelled spi bus node with child nodes for > > each of the spi devices. I want to be able to remove/replace the > > child nodes without having to label them first. > > > > g. > > > > Why not just add the label to the node you need first? That may not be possible and/or desirable. For instance, when the tree is extracted from /proc. Or if the base tree in stored in the kernel source and an external tool is modifying it for a specific purpose (when unable to patch the kernel tree). Or for generated device trees from the Xilinx toolchain for FPGAs. Modifying the source data isn't always an option. Plus I want the ability to logically group related changes. ie. delete a device and add a device to the same bus at the same time. Or delete a phy node, add a replacement phy node at a different address, and update the ethernet phy-device phandle in the same block. g.