[PATCH 1/5] ARM: dts: lpc32xx: add bus surfix for simple-bus

[PATCH 1/5] ARM: dts: lpc32xx: add bus surfix for simple-bus

[Frank Li]

add bus surfix for simple-bus to fix below CHECK_DTBS warnings:
arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-ea3250.dtb: usb (simple-bus): $nodename:0: 'usb' does not match '^([a-z][a-z0-9\\-]+-bus|bus|localbus|soc|axi|ahb|apb)(@.+)?$'
        from schema $id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/simple-bus.yaml#

Signed-off-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
---
 arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi
index 2236901a00313..9790b0a1d6537 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi
@@ -86,7 +86,7 @@ dma: dma-controller@31000000 {
 			#dma-cells = <2>;
 		};
 
-		usb {
+		usb-bus {
 			#address-cells = <1>;
 			#size-cells = <1>;
 			compatible = "simple-bus";
@@ -307,14 +307,14 @@ mpwm: pwm@400e8000 {
 			};
 		};
 
-		fab {
+		fab-bus {
 			#address-cells = <1>;
 			#size-cells = <1>;
 			compatible = "simple-bus";
 			ranges = <0x20000000 0x20000000 0x30000000>;
 
 			/* System Control Block */
-			scb {
+			scb-bus {
 				compatible = "simple-bus";
 				ranges = <0x0 0x40004000 0x00001000>;
 				#address-cells = <1>;
-- 
2.34.1

[PATCH 2/5] ARM: dts: lpc32xx: add sspclk clock for SPI[0,1]

[Frank Li]

add sspclk clock for SPI[0,1] to fix below CHECK_DTB warning:
  arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-phy3250.dtb: spi@2008c000 (arm,pl022): clock-names:0: 'sspclk' was expected

Signed-off-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
---
 arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi | 8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi
index 9790b0a1d6537..77f210a2152dc 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi
@@ -179,8 +179,8 @@ ssp0: spi@20084000 {
 				compatible = "arm,pl022", "arm,primecell";
 				reg = <0x20084000 0x1000>;
 				interrupts = <20 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
-				clocks = <&clk LPC32XX_CLK_SSP0>;
-				clock-names = "apb_pclk";
+				clocks =<&clk LPC32XX_CLK_SSP0>, <&clk LPC32XX_CLK_SSP0>;
+				clock-names = "sspclk", "apb_pclk";
 				#address-cells = <1>;
 				#size-cells = <0>;
 				status = "disabled";
@@ -203,8 +203,8 @@ ssp1: spi@2008c000 {
 				compatible = "arm,pl022", "arm,primecell";
 				reg = <0x2008c000 0x1000>;
 				interrupts = <21 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
-				clocks = <&clk LPC32XX_CLK_SSP1>;
-				clock-names = "apb_pclk";
+				clocks = <&clk LPC32XX_CLK_SSP1>, <&clk LPC32XX_CLK_SSP1>;
+				clock-names = "sspclk", "apb_pclk";
 				#address-cells = <1>;
 				#size-cells = <0>;
 				status = "disabled";
-- 
2.34.1

Re: [PATCH 2/5] ARM: dts: lpc32xx: add sspclk clock for SPI[0,1]

[Vladimir Zapolskiy]

Hi Frank.

On 10/29/25 22:27, Frank Li wrote:
> add sspclk clock for SPI[0,1] to fix below CHECK_DTB warning:
>    arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-phy3250.dtb: spi@2008c000 (arm,pl022): clock-names:0: 'sspclk' was expected
> 
> Signed-off-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
> ---
>   arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi | 8 ++++----
>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi
> index 9790b0a1d6537..77f210a2152dc 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi
> @@ -179,8 +179,8 @@ ssp0: spi@20084000 {
>   				compatible = "arm,pl022", "arm,primecell";
>   				reg = <0x20084000 0x1000>;
>   				interrupts = <20 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
> -				clocks = <&clk LPC32XX_CLK_SSP0>;
> -				clock-names = "apb_pclk";
> +				clocks =<&clk LPC32XX_CLK_SSP0>, <&clk LPC32XX_CLK_SSP0>;
> +				clock-names = "sspclk", "apb_pclk";
>   				#address-cells = <1>;
>   				#size-cells = <0>;
>   				status = "disabled";
> @@ -203,8 +203,8 @@ ssp1: spi@2008c000 {
>   				compatible = "arm,pl022", "arm,primecell";
>   				reg = <0x2008c000 0x1000>;
>   				interrupts = <21 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
> -				clocks = <&clk LPC32XX_CLK_SSP1>;
> -				clock-names = "apb_pclk";
> +				clocks = <&clk LPC32XX_CLK_SSP1>, <&clk LPC32XX_CLK_SSP1>;
> +				clock-names = "sspclk", "apb_pclk";
>   				#address-cells = <1>;
>   				#size-cells = <0>;
>   				status = "disabled";

This one I won't apply now, since there is another much earlier sent
and discussed change:

https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220311093800.18778-4-singh.kuldeep87k@gmail.com/

The thing is formally it's a DT ABI change. I'm pro to apply the change, but
let me say I need to get a bit more of courage to resend it and to push it
through as an incredibly unlikely but still potentially harmful change to
some unknown user.

-- 
Best wishes,
Vladimir

[PATCH 3/5] ARM: dts: lpc3250-ea3250: add key- prefix for gpio-keys

[Frank Li]

Add key- prefix to fix below CHECK_DTB warning:
  arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-ea3250.dtb: gpio-keys (gpio-keys): 'joy0', ... do not match any of the regexes: '^(button|...)$', 'pinctrl-[0-9]+

Signed-off-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
---
 arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-ea3250.dts | 18 +++++++++---------
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-ea3250.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-ea3250.dts
index 63c6f17bb7c9f..837a3cfa8e7c8 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-ea3250.dts
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-ea3250.dts
@@ -27,55 +27,55 @@ button {
 			gpios = <&gpio 4 1 0>; /* GPI_P3 1 */
 		};
 
-		key1 {
+		key-1 {
 			label = "KEY1";
 			linux,code = <1>;
 			gpios = <&pca9532 0 0>;
 		};
 
-		key2 {
+		key-2 {
 			label = "KEY2";
 			linux,code = <2>;
 			gpios = <&pca9532 1 0>;
 		};
 
-		key3 {
+		key-3 {
 			label = "KEY3";
 			linux,code = <3>;
 			gpios = <&pca9532 2 0>;
 		};
 
-		key4 {
+		key-4 {
 			label = "KEY4";
 			linux,code = <4>;
 			gpios = <&pca9532 3 0>;
 		};
 
-		joy0 {
+		key-joy0 {
 			label = "Joystick Key 0";
 			linux,code = <10>;
 			gpios = <&gpio 2 0 0>; /* P2.0 */
 		};
 
-		joy1 {
+		key-joy1 {
 			label = "Joystick Key 1";
 			linux,code = <11>;
 			gpios = <&gpio 2 1 0>; /* P2.1 */
 		};
 
-		joy2 {
+		key-joy2 {
 			label = "Joystick Key 2";
 			linux,code = <12>;
 			gpios = <&gpio 2 2 0>; /* P2.2 */
 		};
 
-		joy3 {
+		key-joy3 {
 			label = "Joystick Key 3";
 			linux,code = <13>;
 			gpios = <&gpio 2 3 0>; /* P2.3 */
 		};
 
-		joy4 {
+		key-joy4 {
 			label = "Joystick Key 4";
 			linux,code = <14>;
 			gpios = <&gpio 2 4 0>; /* P2.4 */
-- 
2.34.1

Re: [PATCH 3/5] ARM: dts: lpc3250-ea3250: add key- prefix for gpio-keys

[Vladimir Zapolskiy]

Hi Frank.

On 10/29/25 22:27, Frank Li wrote:
> Add key- prefix to fix below CHECK_DTB warning:
>    arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-ea3250.dtb: gpio-keys (gpio-keys): 'joy0', ... do not match any of the regexes: '^(button|...)$', 'pinctrl-[0-9]+
> 
> Signed-off-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
> ---
>   arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-ea3250.dts | 18 +++++++++---------
>   1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-ea3250.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-ea3250.dts
> index 63c6f17bb7c9f..837a3cfa8e7c8 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-ea3250.dts
> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-ea3250.dts
> @@ -27,55 +27,55 @@ button {
>   			gpios = <&gpio 4 1 0>; /* GPI_P3 1 */
>   		};
>   
> -		key1 {
> +		key-1 {
>   			label = "KEY1";
>   			linux,code = <1>;
>   			gpios = <&pca9532 0 0>;
>   		};
>   
> -		key2 {
> +		key-2 {
>   			label = "KEY2";
>   			linux,code = <2>;
>   			gpios = <&pca9532 1 0>;
>   		};
>   
> -		key3 {
> +		key-3 {
>   			label = "KEY3";
>   			linux,code = <3>;
>   			gpios = <&pca9532 2 0>;
>   		};
>   
> -		key4 {
> +		key-4 {
>   			label = "KEY4";
>   			linux,code = <4>;
>   			gpios = <&pca9532 3 0>;
>   		};
>   
> -		joy0 {
> +		key-joy0 {
>   			label = "Joystick Key 0";
>   			linux,code = <10>;
>   			gpios = <&gpio 2 0 0>; /* P2.0 */
>   		};
>   
> -		joy1 {
> +		key-joy1 {
>   			label = "Joystick Key 1";
>   			linux,code = <11>;
>   			gpios = <&gpio 2 1 0>; /* P2.1 */
>   		};
>   
> -		joy2 {
> +		key-joy2 {
>   			label = "Joystick Key 2";
>   			linux,code = <12>;
>   			gpios = <&gpio 2 2 0>; /* P2.2 */
>   		};
>   
> -		joy3 {
> +		key-joy3 {
>   			label = "Joystick Key 3";
>   			linux,code = <13>;
>   			gpios = <&gpio 2 3 0>; /* P2.3 */
>   		};
>   
> -		joy4 {
> +		key-joy4 {
>   			label = "Joystick Key 4";
>   			linux,code = <14>;
>   			gpios = <&gpio 2 4 0>; /* P2.4 */

Reviewed-by: Vladimir Zapolskiy <vz@mleia.com>

Thank you for the contributions, I hope I'll find time tomorrow
to send a tiny pull request:
* lpc43xx board compatible strings,
* this change,
* any other your changes with my review comments satisfied, if I get them.

-- 
Best wishes,
Vladimir

[PATCH 4/5] ARM: dts: lpc3250-phy3250: add at25 required properties

[Frank Li]

Add at25 required properties (size, address-width and pagesize), which
duplicate deprecated properties.

Change nodename 'at25' to 'eeprom'.

Fix below CHECK_DTB warning:
  arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-phy3250.dtb: at25@0 (atmel,at25): 'pagesize' is a required property
  arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-phy3250.dtb: at25@0 (atmel,at25): $nodename: 'anyOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:

Signed-off-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
---
 arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-phy3250.dts | 6 +++++-
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-phy3250.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-phy3250.dts
index 21a6d0bca1e8a..15463a96938cc 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-phy3250.dts
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-phy3250.dts
@@ -200,7 +200,7 @@ &ssp0 {
 	cs-gpios = <&gpio 3 5 0>;
 	status = "okay";
 
-	eeprom: at25@0 {
+	eeprom: eeprom@0 {
 		compatible = "atmel,at25";
 		reg = <0>;
 		spi-max-frequency = <5000000>;
@@ -216,6 +216,10 @@ eeprom: at25@0 {
 		at25,byte-len = <0x8000>;
 		at25,addr-mode = <2>;
 		at25,page-size = <64>;
+
+		size = <0x8000>;
+		address-width = <16>;
+		pagesize = <64>;
 	};
 };
 
-- 
2.34.1

Re: [PATCH 4/5] ARM: dts: lpc3250-phy3250: add at25 required properties

[Vladimir Zapolskiy]

Hi Frank.

On 10/29/25 22:28, Frank Li wrote:
> Add at25 required properties (size, address-width and pagesize), which
> duplicate deprecated properties.
> 
> Change nodename 'at25' to 'eeprom'.
> 
> Fix below CHECK_DTB warning:
>    arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-phy3250.dtb: at25@0 (atmel,at25): 'pagesize' is a required property
>    arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-phy3250.dtb: at25@0 (atmel,at25): $nodename: 'anyOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
> 
> Signed-off-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
> ---
>   arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-phy3250.dts | 6 +++++-
>   1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-phy3250.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-phy3250.dts
> index 21a6d0bca1e8a..15463a96938cc 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-phy3250.dts
> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-phy3250.dts
> @@ -200,7 +200,7 @@ &ssp0 {
>   	cs-gpios = <&gpio 3 5 0>;
>   	status = "okay";
>   
> -	eeprom: at25@0 {
> +	eeprom: eeprom@0 {
>   		compatible = "atmel,at25";
>   		reg = <0>;
>   		spi-max-frequency = <5000000>;
> @@ -216,6 +216,10 @@ eeprom: at25@0 {
>   		at25,byte-len = <0x8000>;
>   		at25,addr-mode = <2>;
>   		at25,page-size = <64>;
> +
> +		size = <0x8000>;
> +		address-width = <16>;
> +		pagesize = <64>;

Is there any need to have both sets of properties?

I'd suggest to remove the deprecated set in a separate patch, note
that your done change is not described in the commit message.

>   	};
>   };
>   

-- 
Best wishes,
Vladimir

Re: [PATCH 4/5] ARM: dts: lpc3250-phy3250: add at25 required properties

[Frank Li]

On Fri, Nov 14, 2025 at 01:47:48AM +0200, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
> Hi Frank.
>
> On 10/29/25 22:28, Frank Li wrote:
> > Add at25 required properties (size, address-width and pagesize), which
> > duplicate deprecated properties.
> >
> > Change nodename 'at25' to 'eeprom'.
> >
> > Fix below CHECK_DTB warning:
> >    arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-phy3250.dtb: at25@0 (atmel,at25): 'pagesize' is a required property
> >    arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-phy3250.dtb: at25@0 (atmel,at25): $nodename: 'anyOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
> > ---
> >   arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-phy3250.dts | 6 +++++-
> >   1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-phy3250.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-phy3250.dts
> > index 21a6d0bca1e8a..15463a96938cc 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-phy3250.dts
> > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-phy3250.dts
> > @@ -200,7 +200,7 @@ &ssp0 {
> >   	cs-gpios = <&gpio 3 5 0>;
> >   	status = "okay";
> > -	eeprom: at25@0 {
> > +	eeprom: eeprom@0 {
> >   		compatible = "atmel,at25";
> >   		reg = <0>;
> >   		spi-max-frequency = <5000000>;
> > @@ -216,6 +216,10 @@ eeprom: at25@0 {
> >   		at25,byte-len = <0x8000>;
> >   		at25,addr-mode = <2>;
> >   		at25,page-size = <64>;
> > +
> > +		size = <0x8000>;
> > +		address-width = <16>;
> > +		pagesize = <64>;
>
> Is there any need to have both sets of properties?
>

Generally, keep old one just for back compatible. It is quite common for
this case.

I am NOT sure if it is safe enough to remove deprecated properties now.

> I'd suggest to remove the deprecated set in a separate patch, note
> that your done change is not described in the commit message.

Which part is not described?

Frank
>
> >   	};
> >   };
>
> --
> Best wishes,
> Vladimir

Re: [PATCH 4/5] ARM: dts: lpc3250-phy3250: add at25 required properties

[Vladimir Zapolskiy]

Hi Frank.

On 11/14/25 18:14, Frank Li wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 14, 2025 at 01:47:48AM +0200, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
>> Hi Frank.
>>
>> On 10/29/25 22:28, Frank Li wrote:
>>> Add at25 required properties (size, address-width and pagesize), which
>>> duplicate deprecated properties.
>>>
>>> Change nodename 'at25' to 'eeprom'.
>>>
>>> Fix below CHECK_DTB warning:
>>>     arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-phy3250.dtb: at25@0 (atmel,at25): 'pagesize' is a required property
>>>     arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-phy3250.dtb: at25@0 (atmel,at25): $nodename: 'anyOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
>>> ---
>>>    arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-phy3250.dts | 6 +++++-
>>>    1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-phy3250.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-phy3250.dts
>>> index 21a6d0bca1e8a..15463a96938cc 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-phy3250.dts
>>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-phy3250.dts
>>> @@ -200,7 +200,7 @@ &ssp0 {
>>>    	cs-gpios = <&gpio 3 5 0>;
>>>    	status = "okay";
>>> -	eeprom: at25@0 {
>>> +	eeprom: eeprom@0 {
>>>    		compatible = "atmel,at25";
>>>    		reg = <0>;
>>>    		spi-max-frequency = <5000000>;
>>> @@ -216,6 +216,10 @@ eeprom: at25@0 {
>>>    		at25,byte-len = <0x8000>;
>>>    		at25,addr-mode = <2>;
>>>    		at25,page-size = <64>;
>>> +
>>> +		size = <0x8000>;
>>> +		address-width = <16>;
>>> +		pagesize = <64>;
>>
>> Is there any need to have both sets of properties?
>>
> 
> Generally, keep old one just for back compatible. It is quite common for
> this case.
> 
> I am NOT sure if it is safe enough to remove deprecated properties now.
> 

It should be safe to remove the deprecated properties, it is fine.

This way the backward compatibility is preserved, and while the forward
compatibility is not preserved, it is not supposed to be preserved anyway.

>> I'd suggest to remove the deprecated set in a separate patch, note
>> that your done change is not described in the commit message.
> 
> Which part is not described?
> 

Sorry for it, I reread the commit message, and both changes are mentined,
but please split heterogeneous changes into separate patches.

-- 
Best wishes,
Vladimir

[PATCH 5/5] ARM: dts: lpc32xx: update #address-cells of arm,pl175 to 2

[Frank Li]

Change #address-cells of arm,pl175 to 2 to fix below CHECK_DTBS warnings:
  arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-ea3250.dtb: memory-controller@31080000 (arm,pl175): #address-cells: 2 was expected
        from schema $id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/memory-controllers/arm,pl172.yaml#

Signed-off-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
---
 arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi
index 77f210a2152dc..0249a1838ee0d 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi
@@ -155,7 +155,7 @@ emc: memory-controller@31080000 {
 			reg = <0x31080000 0x1000>;
 			clocks = <&clk LPC32XX_CLK_DDRAM>, <&clk LPC32XX_CLK_DDRAM>;
 			clock-names = "mpmcclk", "apb_pclk";
-			#address-cells = <1>;
+			#address-cells = <2>;
 			#size-cells = <1>;
 
 			ranges = <0 0xe0000000 0x01000000>,
-- 
2.34.1

Re: [PATCH 5/5] ARM: dts: lpc32xx: update #address-cells of arm,pl175 to 2

[Vladimir Zapolskiy]

Hi Frank.

On 10/29/25 22:28, Frank Li wrote:
> Change #address-cells of arm,pl175 to 2 to fix below CHECK_DTBS warnings:
>    arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-ea3250.dtb: memory-controller@31080000 (arm,pl175): #address-cells: 2 was expected
>          from schema $id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/memory-controllers/arm,pl172.yaml#
> 
> Signed-off-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
> ---
>   arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi | 2 +-
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi
> index 77f210a2152dc..0249a1838ee0d 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi
> @@ -155,7 +155,7 @@ emc: memory-controller@31080000 {
>   			reg = <0x31080000 0x1000>;
>   			clocks = <&clk LPC32XX_CLK_DDRAM>, <&clk LPC32XX_CLK_DDRAM>;
>   			clock-names = "mpmcclk", "apb_pclk";
> -			#address-cells = <1>;
> +			#address-cells = <2>;
>   			#size-cells = <1>;
>   
>   			ranges = <0 0xe0000000 0x01000000>,

Recently you've made a conversion to YAML for arm,pl17x memory controllers
and now this warning is reported - and by the way I believe and it's
opposite to the commit message, the warning is not reported in the upstream,
because lpc3250-ea3250.dts does not enable the controller.

I wonder and let me ask you, why two address cells are needed here?

My default preference is to get one address cell for NOR flash ICs, and
I'd suggest to make a change to the dt binding of the controller.

-- 
Best wishes,
Vladimir

Re: [PATCH 1/5] ARM: dts: lpc32xx: add bus surfix for simple-bus

[Vladimir Zapolskiy]

Hi Frank.

On 10/29/25 22:27, Frank Li wrote:
> add bus surfix for simple-bus to fix below CHECK_DTBS warnings:

typo in the subject and in the commit message above, s/surfix/suffix/

> arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-ea3250.dtb: usb (simple-bus): $nodename:0: 'usb' does not match '^([a-z][a-z0-9\\-]+-bus|bus|localbus|soc|axi|ahb|apb)(@.+)?$'
>          from schema $id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/simple-bus.yaml#
> 
> Signed-off-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
> ---
>   arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi | 6 +++---
>   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi
> index 2236901a00313..9790b0a1d6537 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi
> @@ -86,7 +86,7 @@ dma: dma-controller@31000000 {
>   			#dma-cells = <2>;
>   		};
>   
> -		usb {
> +		usb-bus {

Device nodes under "usb" should be just elevated, the "simple-bus" here
was used only to group some controllers together.

>   			#address-cells = <1>;
>   			#size-cells = <1>;
>   			compatible = "simple-bus";
> @@ -307,14 +307,14 @@ mpwm: pwm@400e8000 {
>   			};
>   		};
>   
> -		fab {
> +		fab-bus {

FAB shall find its place in the AXI/AHB/APB/... list, isn't it?

>   			#address-cells = <1>;
>   			#size-cells = <1>;
>   			compatible = "simple-bus";
>   			ranges = <0x20000000 0x20000000 0x30000000>;
>   
>   			/* System Control Block */
> -			scb {
> +			scb-bus {
>   				compatible = "simple-bus";
>   				ranges = <0x0 0x40004000 0x00001000>;
>   				#address-cells = <1>;

Here "simple-bus" is also unjustified...

-- 
Best wishes,
Vladimir

Re: [PATCH 1/5] ARM: dts: lpc32xx: add bus surfix for simple-bus

[Frank Li]

On Fri, Nov 14, 2025 at 01:55:50AM +0200, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
> Hi Frank.
>
> On 10/29/25 22:27, Frank Li wrote:
> > add bus surfix for simple-bus to fix below CHECK_DTBS warnings:
>
> typo in the subject and in the commit message above, s/surfix/suffix/
>
> > arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-ea3250.dtb: usb (simple-bus): $nodename:0: 'usb' does not match '^([a-z][a-z0-9\\-]+-bus|bus|localbus|soc|axi|ahb|apb)(@.+)?$'
> >          from schema $id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/simple-bus.yaml#
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
> > ---
> >   arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi | 6 +++---
> >   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi
> > index 2236901a00313..9790b0a1d6537 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi
> > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi
> > @@ -86,7 +86,7 @@ dma: dma-controller@31000000 {
> >   			#dma-cells = <2>;
> >   		};
> > -		usb {
> > +		usb-bus {
>
> Device nodes under "usb" should be just elevated, the "simple-bus" here
> was used only to group some controllers together.
>
> >   			#address-cells = <1>;
> >   			#size-cells = <1>;
> >   			compatible = "simple-bus";
> > @@ -307,14 +307,14 @@ mpwm: pwm@400e8000 {
> >   			};
> >   		};
> > -		fab {
> > +		fab-bus {
>
> FAB shall find its place in the AXI/AHB/APB/... list, isn't it?

what's FAB means? It is too short and hard to find exact information
from google?

Frank
>
> >   			#address-cells = <1>;
> >   			#size-cells = <1>;
> >   			compatible = "simple-bus";
> >   			ranges = <0x20000000 0x20000000 0x30000000>;
> >   			/* System Control Block */
> > -			scb {
> > +			scb-bus {
> >   				compatible = "simple-bus";
> >   				ranges = <0x0 0x40004000 0x00001000>;
> >   				#address-cells = <1>;
>
> Here "simple-bus" is also unjustified...
>
> --
> Best wishes,
> Vladimir

Re: [PATCH 1/5] ARM: dts: lpc32xx: add bus surfix for simple-bus

[Vladimir Zapolskiy]

On 11/14/25 18:19, Frank Li wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 14, 2025 at 01:55:50AM +0200, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
>> Hi Frank.
>>
>> On 10/29/25 22:27, Frank Li wrote:
>>> add bus surfix for simple-bus to fix below CHECK_DTBS warnings:
>>
>> typo in the subject and in the commit message above, s/surfix/suffix/
>>
>>> arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-ea3250.dtb: usb (simple-bus): $nodename:0: 'usb' does not match '^([a-z][a-z0-9\\-]+-bus|bus|localbus|soc|axi|ahb|apb)(@.+)?$'
>>>           from schema $id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/simple-bus.yaml#
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
>>> ---
>>>    arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi | 6 +++---
>>>    1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi
>>> index 2236901a00313..9790b0a1d6537 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi
>>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi
>>> @@ -86,7 +86,7 @@ dma: dma-controller@31000000 {
>>>    			#dma-cells = <2>;
>>>    		};
>>> -		usb {
>>> +		usb-bus {
>>
>> Device nodes under "usb" should be just elevated, the "simple-bus" here
>> was used only to group some controllers together.
>>
>>>    			#address-cells = <1>;
>>>    			#size-cells = <1>;
>>>    			compatible = "simple-bus";
>>> @@ -307,14 +307,14 @@ mpwm: pwm@400e8000 {
>>>    			};
>>>    		};
>>> -		fab {
>>> +		fab-bus {
>>
>> FAB shall find its place in the AXI/AHB/APB/... list, isn't it?
> 
> what's FAB means? It is too short and hard to find exact information
> from google?

You may find UM10326 "LPC32x0 and LPC32x0/01 User manual" document online,
LPC32xx is an old and simple SoC.

FAB stands for Fast Access Bus, it's a bus behind AHB to FAB bridge, you
may get an overview from "Fig 3. LPC32x0 block diagram, AHB matrix view",
and "Table 4. Peripheral devices on the LPC32x0" lists all FAB peripherals.

So, FAB is very similar to APB functionally, could it be just another
name of APB?.. Likely we won't know for sure.

I'd suggest to send a change, which adds "fab" to the list of permitted
device tree node names with a "simple-bus" compatible. Or let me know,
and I'll do it myself whenever I find a minute for it...

>>>    			#address-cells = <1>;
>>>    			#size-cells = <1>;
>>>    			compatible = "simple-bus";
>>>    			ranges = <0x20000000 0x20000000 0x30000000>;
>>>    			/* System Control Block */
>>> -			scb {
>>> +			scb-bus {
>>>    				compatible = "simple-bus";
>>>    				ranges = <0x0 0x40004000 0x00001000>;
>>>    				#address-cells = <1>;
>>
>> Here "simple-bus" is also unjustified...

-- 
Best wishes,
Vladimir

Re: [PATCH 1/5] ARM: dts: lpc32xx: add bus surfix for simple-bus

[Frank Li]

On Fri, Nov 14, 2025 at 06:44:03PM +0200, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
> On 11/14/25 18:19, Frank Li wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 14, 2025 at 01:55:50AM +0200, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
> > > Hi Frank.
> > >
> > > On 10/29/25 22:27, Frank Li wrote:
> > > > add bus surfix for simple-bus to fix below CHECK_DTBS warnings:
> > >
> > > typo in the subject and in the commit message above, s/surfix/suffix/
> > >
> > > > arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc3250-ea3250.dtb: usb (simple-bus): $nodename:0: 'usb' does not match '^([a-z][a-z0-9\\-]+-bus|bus|localbus|soc|axi|ahb|apb)(@.+)?$'
> > > >           from schema $id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/simple-bus.yaml#
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >    arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi | 6 +++---
> > > >    1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi
> > > > index 2236901a00313..9790b0a1d6537 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi
> > > > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/lpc/lpc32xx.dtsi
> > > > @@ -86,7 +86,7 @@ dma: dma-controller@31000000 {
> > > >    			#dma-cells = <2>;
> > > >    		};
> > > > -		usb {
> > > > +		usb-bus {
> > >
> > > Device nodes under "usb" should be just elevated, the "simple-bus" here
> > > was used only to group some controllers together.
> > >
> > > >    			#address-cells = <1>;
> > > >    			#size-cells = <1>;
> > > >    			compatible = "simple-bus";
> > > > @@ -307,14 +307,14 @@ mpwm: pwm@400e8000 {
> > > >    			};
> > > >    		};
> > > > -		fab {
> > > > +		fab-bus {
> > >
> > > FAB shall find its place in the AXI/AHB/APB/... list, isn't it?
> >
> > what's FAB means? It is too short and hard to find exact information
> > from google?
>
> You may find UM10326 "LPC32x0 and LPC32x0/01 User manual" document online,
> LPC32xx is an old and simple SoC.
>
> FAB stands for Fast Access Bus, it's a bus behind AHB to FAB bridge, you
> may get an overview from "Fig 3. LPC32x0 block diagram, AHB matrix view",
> and "Table 4. Peripheral devices on the LPC32x0" lists all FAB peripherals.
>
> So, FAB is very similar to APB functionally, could it be just another
> name of APB?.. Likely we won't know for sure.
>
> I'd suggest to send a change, which adds "fab" to the list of permitted
> device tree node names with a "simple-bus" compatible. Or let me know,
> and I'll do it myself whenever I find a minute for it...

If only use by NXP, I think it is not easy to add it. There are too much
similar vendor specific bus name in other Soc.

It is local in https://github.com/devicetree-org/dt-schema.git
dt-schema/dtschema/schemas

    pattern: '^([a-z][a-z0-9\-]+-bus|bus|localbus|soc|axi|ahb|apb)(@.+)?$'

Most likely Rob prefer use prefix.

Anyway, you can try if you want.

Frank
>
> > > >    			#address-cells = <1>;
> > > >    			#size-cells = <1>;
> > > >    			compatible = "simple-bus";
> > > >    			ranges = <0x20000000 0x20000000 0x30000000>;
> > > >    			/* System Control Block */
> > > > -			scb {
> > > > +			scb-bus {
> > > >    				compatible = "simple-bus";
> > > >    				ranges = <0x0 0x40004000 0x00001000>;
> > > >    				#address-cells = <1>;
> > >
> > > Here "simple-bus" is also unjustified...
>
> --
> Best wishes,
> Vladimir
>