Re: [PATCH 7/7] [POWERPC] Xilinx: Update booting-without-of.

["Grant Likely" <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>]

On 12/17/07, Stephen Neuendorffer <stephen.neuendorffer@xilinx.com> wrote:
>
> When the driver no longer requires the port number, it's easy to drop.
> Until then, I'll keep it in.
>
> Also, I'm not so sure that moving to completely generic names is really
> worth the effort...  All the 'semantically' interesting' information is
> already in the device tree somewhere else.  In the limit, the node name
> could just be a randomly generated string.  So now we have a matter of
> taste: what is the right amount of detail to put in so that someone who
> looks at the tree can easily understand what's going on, but not be
> overwhelmed?

True, but part of 'taste' is following the established OF conventions
such as the generic names  ( http://playground.sun.com/1275/practice/
).  Those conventions come directly from the lessons learned by real
open firmware over the years.  It's okay to break convention; but only
if you've got a *damn* *good* reason for doing so.  :-)

>  The xilinx ip name seems to usually do that almost as well as
> a 'generic name'.  Anyway, you proved me wrong last time after a bunch of
> mulling it over, so maybe I'll just take your word for it and do it that
> way. :)

heh,   And a big reason I'm arguing it is David, Segher and others
took me to task for making the same mistakes.  :-)

> In other news, my computer seems to have died this morning, so productivity
> may be low. :)

Fun.  :-(

Cheers,
g.

-- 
Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng.
Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.
grant.likely@secretlab.ca
(403) 399-0195