From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C50CDDF10 for ; Thu, 6 Sep 2007 23:32:12 +1000 (EST) In-Reply-To: <20070904002745.GB20549@localhost.localdomain> References: <20070831175006.17240@gmx.net> <20070903013431.GG31499@localhost.localdomain> <1188808900.5972.133.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20070903101234.GA12212@localhost.localdomain> <20070903161156.306700@gmx.net> <6858c7a36ed061265937daa7b14cc5ac@kernel.crashing.org> <20070904002745.GB20549@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v623) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: From: Segher Boessenkool Subject: Re: [RFC] AmigaOne device tree source v2 Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2007 15:31:52 +0200 To: David Gibson Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , > Hrm.. IIRC, it is permissible under Linux to only include device nodes > for those PCI devices where something must be specified which can't be > proved via PCI. It is. It isn't clear (to me, at least) which properties are required in a PCI node that exists for e.g. interrupt reasons only; or how the kernel decides if a PCI node is a "real" PCI node (i.e., using the PCI binding), or an "empty" PCI node. Segher