[PATCH v3 09/13] ARM: dts: armada-375: Fixup soc DT warning

[thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com (Thomas Petazzoni)]

Hello,

On Fri, 18 Nov 2016 10:38:32 +0100, Gregory CLEMENT wrote:

> >> > unit address? It doesn't have a 'reg' property if I remember
> >> > correctly.    
> >> 
> >> But it has a range property.  
> >
> > And? There are multiple ranges, and you randomly took the first one for
> > the unit address of the soc node?  
> 
> Not randomly I followed the same rules that for the regs mentioned in
> the ePAPR paragraph 2.2.1.1:
> 
> "The unit-address should match the first address specified in the reg
> property of the node."

But it doesn't say anything about the ranges property. Isn't the dtc
warning in fact over-zealous? The ePAPR says that the unit address
should be the first address of the reg property, but doesn't say
anything about the ranges property.

What I dislike is that there absolutely nothing that forces the ranges
to be written in this order. In another board, it can be written in a
completely different order, which means that the unit address would be
different, which is really silly.

I continue to believe this rule doesn't make sense, and the soc node
shouldn't have a unit address. Maybe Rob or Mark (who is not in Cc, for
some reason?) should say a word about this?

Best regards,

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
http://free-electrons.com