From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rob Herring Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpio: document how to order GPIO controllers Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2016 17:03:09 -0500 Message-ID: <20160717220309.GA22711@rob-hp-laptop> References: <1467355333-8813-1-git-send-email-u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> <20160705140546.GA10601@rob-hp-laptop> <20160705180447.GP16643@pengutronix.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-gpio-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Linus Walleij Cc: Uwe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?= , Alexandre Courbot , Mark Rutland , Sascha Hauer , "linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jul 06, 2016 at 11:34:37AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 8:04 PM, Uwe Kleine-K=F6nig > wrote: > > [Rob]: >=20 > >> Like SPI and I2C, I'm against further abuse of aliases for this pu= rpose > >> [1]. >=20 > So what about the usecase for serial ports, where we use this > to make sure the console come out where we want it? Is that > also considered abuse or legitimate use? Note: I'm not trying to be > snarky, I'm trying to understand what is the right and wrong use > of alias. I'm confused about it right now :( I guess it comes down to how ingrained the usage of any numbering is.=20 =46or consoles, it was pretty important to maintain numbering and no=20 alternative. But now with stdout-path that is less important. Perhaps i= f=20 you have inittab with tty devices, then it is still needed. So I guess I would summarize the requirement to be only cases needing t= o=20 maintain numbering for existing userspace. The only users really caring= =20 about this have been on N900. Rob -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-gpio" i= n the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html