From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 14:03:20 +0200 Subject: [PATCH v3 10/12] ARM: mvebu: Relocate Armada 370/XP DeviceBus device tree nodes In-Reply-To: <20130618220929.GA24056@localhost> References: <1371554737-25319-1-git-send-email-ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com> <201306181816.26530.arnd@arndb.de> <20130618220929.GA24056@localhost> Message-ID: <201306191403.20569.arnd@arndb.de> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wednesday 19 June 2013, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: > On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 06:16:26PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Tuesday 18 June 2013, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: > > > > > > + devbus-bootcs { > > > + compatible = "marvell,mvebu-devbus"; > > > + reg = <0xffff0001 0x10400 0x8>; > > > + ranges = <0 MBUS_ID(0x01, 0x2f) 0 0xffffffff>; > > > + #address-cells = <1>; > > > + #size-cells = <1>; > > > + clocks = <&coreclk 0>; > > > + status = "disabled"; > > > + }; > > > > This is a violation of the binding as far as I can tell, since you don't specify ranges > > to access the 0xffff0001 0x10400 address. However, as I explained in my comment for > > the binding, I think you should clarify the binding and leave the implementation > > as you have it here. > > > > Mmm... again I got lost here. Which 'ranges' you say I don't specify to > access the (formerly) 0xffff0001? > > AFAIK, 'ranges' are only for children translation, which means I don't > need to specify a ranges for that in the devbus node, but in its parent, > right? > > This ranges thing can be very tricky, so please correct me if I'm > mistaken. You already clarified that the binding was wrong. This was about the part where you replied: >> Do you really want to require the child to provide a "ranges" property? >> I think this makes it more complicated to specify devices that belong >> into the "internal-regs" category. >> > >No, this text is actually a left-over from the previous patchset, in >current v3 patchset MBus children are not required to have any ranges. >On the otherside, although you will need one except in the most trivial >cases like for the BootROM. With that change, everything above is ok. Arnd From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 10/12] ARM: mvebu: Relocate Armada 370/XP DeviceBus device tree nodes Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 14:03:20 +0200 Message-ID: <201306191403.20569.arnd@arndb.de> References: <1371554737-25319-1-git-send-email-ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com> <201306181816.26530.arnd@arndb.de> <20130618220929.GA24056@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20130618220929.GA24056@localhost> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org Sender: "devicetree-discuss" To: Ezequiel Garcia Cc: Andrew Lunn , Jason Cooper , devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org, Jason Gunthorpe , Maen Suleiman , Lior Amsalem , linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, Sebastian Hesselbarth List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Wednesday 19 June 2013, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: > On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 06:16:26PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Tuesday 18 June 2013, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: > > > > > > + devbus-bootcs { > > > + compatible = "marvell,mvebu-devbus"; > > > + reg = <0xffff0001 0x10400 0x8>; > > > + ranges = <0 MBUS_ID(0x01, 0x2f) 0 0xffffffff>; > > > + #address-cells = <1>; > > > + #size-cells = <1>; > > > + clocks = <&coreclk 0>; > > > + status = "disabled"; > > > + }; > > > > This is a violation of the binding as far as I can tell, since you don't specify ranges > > to access the 0xffff0001 0x10400 address. However, as I explained in my comment for > > the binding, I think you should clarify the binding and leave the implementation > > as you have it here. > > > > Mmm... again I got lost here. Which 'ranges' you say I don't specify to > access the (formerly) 0xffff0001? > > AFAIK, 'ranges' are only for children translation, which means I don't > need to specify a ranges for that in the devbus node, but in its parent, > right? > > This ranges thing can be very tricky, so please correct me if I'm > mistaken. You already clarified that the binding was wrong. This was about the part where you replied: >> Do you really want to require the child to provide a "ranges" property? >> I think this makes it more complicated to specify devices that belong >> into the "internal-regs" category. >> > >No, this text is actually a left-over from the previous patchset, in >current v3 patchset MBus children are not required to have any ranges. >On the otherside, although you will need one except in the most trivial >cases like for the BootROM. With that change, everything above is ok. Arnd