From: tomi.valkeinen@ti.com (Tomi Valkeinen) Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2014 17:20:19 +0300 Subject: [PATCH 11/23] ARM: dts: omap5-uevm.dts: add tca6424a In-Reply-To: <53594189.1090508@cogentembedded.com> References: <1398334639-14172-1-git-send-email-tomi.valkeinen@ti.com> <1398334639-14172-12-git-send-email-tomi.valkeinen@ti.com> <53591669.7060502@cogentembedded.com> <5359209F.7000308@ti.com> <53594189.1090508@cogentembedded.com> Message-ID: <535A6F23.1070409@ti.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 24/04/14 19:53, Sergei Shtylyov wrote: >> Right. I wonder what the name should be... "gpio" is out, as the name >> should be more specific. > > No, it's not out. The name should be "gpio at 22", I think it would be > unique. > >> We already have gpio1-8, which are the gpio >> banks from the SoC. > > I don't understand why you are indexing the names while you probably > have the address part after @ that makes them unique already. Ah sorry for the confusion, I misunderstood. I was talking about the label, not the name, of the node. So the labels for the gpio banks are 'gpio2' etc. The names are 'gpio at 123456' etc. And yes, here the name should be 'gpio at 22' as you said. I didn't see any rules about the labels in the ePARP doc, so I guess 'tca6424a' would be a valid one. Maybe not a good one, though, especially if there are multiple tca6424a chips on the board (I need to check). Tomi -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: