From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Stephen Warren <swarren-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Device Tree Overlays Proposal (Was Re: capebus moving
 omap_devices to mach-omap2)
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 11:29:49 -0700
Message-ID: <50A2919D.5030006@wwwdotorg.org>
References: <CACxGe6vu8ek7-K-yDDMXyg9x-oKiFt_cSz+Pz-yZf5U5vwe=0g@mail.gmail.com>
 <50999145.2070306@wwwdotorg.org>
 <CACxGe6v=+8UKerzp9z5cZo6TbXJQ4Nb=fpKgfkuvib_B-BoVdw@mail.gmail.com>
 <509D9089.7020407@wwwdotorg.org>
 <5B124797-6DFD-4C5E-90D7-665AFD4A7873@antoniou-consulting.com>
 <50A12950.6090808@wwwdotorg.org> <20121113072517.GE25915@truffula.fritz.box>
 <50A27BF1.4030502@wwwdotorg.org> <50A28D03.7050002@firmworks.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org>
In-Reply-To: <50A28D03.7050002-D5eQfiDGL7eakBO8gow8eQ@public.gmane.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/options/devicetree-discuss>,
 <mailto:devicetree-discuss-request-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/devicetree-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org>
List-Help: <mailto:devicetree-discuss-request-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss>,
 <mailto:devicetree-discuss-request-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org
Sender: "devicetree-discuss"
 <devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org>
To: Mitch Bradley <wmb-D5eQfiDGL7eakBO8gow8eQ@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>, Matt Porter <mporter-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>, Koen Kooi <koen-QLwJDigV5abLmq1fohREcCpxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org>, Pantelis Antoniou <panto-wVdstyuyKrO8r51toPun2/C9HSW9iNxf@public.gmane.org>, linux-kernel <linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>, Felipe Balbi <balbi-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>, Deepak Saxena <dsaxena-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>, Russ Dill <Russ.Dill-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>, Scott Wood <scottwood-KZfg59tc24xl57MIdRCFDg@public.gmane.org>, linux-omap-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org
List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org

On 11/13/2012 11:10 AM, Mitch Bradley wrote:
> It seems to me that this capebus discussion is missing an important
> point.  The name capebus suggests that it is a bus, so there should be a
> parent node to represent that bus.  It should have a driver whose API
> implements all of the system-interface functions a cape needs.

It was discussed earlier that capebus isn't actually a bus. It's simply
a collection of a bunch of pins from the SoC hooked up to connectors.
I'd agree that it's mis-named.