From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christopher Covington Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] driver core & of: Mark of_nodes of added device as populated Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 12:32:36 -0500 Message-ID: <52FA5EB4.7080008@codeaurora.org> References: <1392137610-27842-1-git-send-email-pawel.moll@arm.com> <1392137610-27842-2-git-send-email-pawel.moll@arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1392137610-27842-2-git-send-email-pawel.moll@arm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Pawel Moll Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org, arm@kernel.org, Mark Rutland , Mike Turquette , Samuel Ortiz , Arnd Bergmann , Ian Campbell , Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Mark Brown , Liam Girdwood , Rob Herring , Guenter Roeck , Kumar Gala , Grant Likely , Lee Jones , David Woodhouse , Jean Delvare List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org Hi Pawel, On 02/11/2014 11:53 AM, Pawel Moll wrote: > This patch tries to solve that issue in a generic way, > adding a "populated" flag which is set in the device_node > structure when a device is being created in the core. > Later, of_platform_populate() skips such nodes (and > its children) in a similar way to the non-available ones. Will there never be a case where it is useful for a parent node to be created early, but not necessarily the child nodes? Might only skipping nodes explicitly marked as populated be a more universal solution? Regards, Christopher -- Employee of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by the Linux Foundation.