-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 50
Open
Description
Is nesting indirect buses allowed? It seems to introduce a lot of
complication if so, and my guess is that it should just be explicitly
forbidden in the specification, but I'd like to know.
For example:
/ {
parent {
compatible = "indirect-bus";
child {
compatible = "indirect-bus";
peripheral@deadbeef { /* ... */ };
};
};
};
If this is allowed, what are the semantics for mapping in
peripheral@deadbeef
above in the address-map
property of a
"cpus,cluster" node?
-
If I map in
parent
, do I automatically getperipheral@deadbeef
too even if I don't mapchild
?- If so, via what address map translation through
child
? - If not, does that mean I can simply ignore any "indirect-bus"
node, along with all of its children, that aren't mapped
explicitly (assumingperipheral@deadbeef
is not present in the
address-map
property)?
- If so, via what address map translation through
-
If I map in
child
but notparent
, how can I generate an
equivalent devicetree? Do I need to liftchild
to be under the
root node or something like that?
Metadata
Metadata
Assignees
Labels
No labels