Segher Boessenkool wrote:
@ in this case seperates the type of resources (pci) from the instance of it (device, function).
So @ is a seperator. Using _ will add ambiguity as it is NOT a seperator. same problem for -.
Stepan, will the OFW guys kill us if we allow ':' as well as @.
We are of course free to go away from the ePAPR flat device tree (we did already to some extent).
Though I wonder whether we should really do this though for something as cosmetic as the address seperator. @ is "at", naturally describing a path or an address where something can be found. I am biased, I used this way of writing paths for 10 years.
If you want to stay close to original OF with your use of the device tree (I think you should, but it's entirely up to you), I can push for creating a new revision of the flat tree format that will include a decent solution to this problem once and for all.
I agree with Segher we should stay close to the "original". That's why we used dtc for our device tree creation to begin with. It has a recognition effect, making it easier for others to join in. Also, at some point we're not writing the DTS manually anymore anyways, so it doesn't really matter ;-))
Stefan