On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
[off-list ref] wrote:

On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 12:42:14PM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 12:32 PM, Mitch Bradley [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

I wonder if it makes sense to create a new device node "/linux-devices" to express a desired mapping from device nodes to /dev entries? ?The properties could be the names of device special files and the values the corresponding node phandles.

I've been trying /really/ hard to avoid doing something like that
because a lot of the time the desired Linux dev name is a
implementation detail, and a potentially unstable one at that. ?If
Linux requires certain devices to have certain names because that is
how it hooks up clocks

As I keep on saying, we don't _have_ to have to match on device name.
If DT can come up with a better way to bind a clock to a particular
device/connection name then DT can provide its own clk_get()
implementation which does that.

Sorry, I overstated the situation.  My point is only that I don't want
encode how Linux currently views the world into the DT, because
implementation details can and do change.

g.