Re: [Gta04-owner] [PATCH 0/3] tty slave device support - version 3.

From: Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>
To: "Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller" <hns@goldelico.com>,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Cc: List for communicating with real GTA04 owners 
	<gta04-owner@goldelico.com>, NeilBrown <neil@brown.name>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Sebastian Reichel <sre@kernel.org>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@linaro.org>,
	Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>,
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Gta04-owner] [PATCH 0/3] tty slave device support - version 3.
Date: Wed, 06 May 2015 08:05:59 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <554A03A7.2000504@hurleysoftware.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <A2594559-CA92-40C2-A06A-AC2483E85CB1@goldelico.com>

On 05/06/2015 07:50 AM, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> No, I am not playing devil’s advocate (which would imply that I am doing this
> for fun to tease the dog), but I feel I have to be the advocate of future board
> designers who want to easily import an existing board DT and overwrite device
> tree nodes to describe design changes, i.e. what slave device is connected to
> which uart.

I dont' see a big distinction at the DTS source level, so your concern is wrt
binary dtbs?

> At least in this regard, the alternatives are really differently easy to handle.
> 
> And, the alternatives have some influence how a tty driver and a slave device
> driver is designed. So that is for me the root question, before discussing (some)
> implementation details.

I would expect _no_ impact on the tty driver; have I overlooked something?

Regards,
Peter Hurley