From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: heiko@sntech.de (Heiko Stuebner) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2016 07:24:31 +0200 Subject: [PATCH v4 1/8] arm64: dts: rockchip: Clean up /memory nodes In-Reply-To: <11405116.V0u286Y0bM@phil> References: <1458136727-32075-1-git-send-email-afaerber@suse.de> <1776429.KtRq374vTa@phil> <11405116.V0u286Y0bM@phil> Message-ID: <1991772.fLocq5xWEX@phil> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Am Donnerstag, 31. M?rz 2016, 22:45:52 schrieb Heiko Stuebner: > Am Donnerstag, 31. M?rz 2016, 19:15:43 schrieb Heiko Stuebner: > > Am Samstag, 19. M?rz 2016, 09:04:08 schrieb Heiko Stuebner: > > > Am Mittwoch, 16. M?rz 2016, 14:58:39 schrieb Andreas F?rber: > > > > A dtc update results in warnings for nodes with reg property but > > > > without > > > > unit address in the node name, so rename /memory to /memory at 0. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Andreas F?rber > > > > > > applied to a dts64-fixes branch for 4.6, after changing the commit > > > message to ---- > > > A dtc update results in warnings for nodes with reg property but > > > without > > > unit address in the node name, so rename /memory to > > > /memory at startaddress > > > (memory starts at 0 in the case of the rk3368). > > > ---- > > > > > > To clarify that the @0 is not arbitary chosen. > > > > This dtc update in question hasn't landed in v4.6-rc1 and from what I > > gathered will need some changes. The patch is obviously still correct, > > but I have now moved it from v4.6-fixes to the regular v4.7 64bit dts > > changes. > > also it seems "memory" is special and memory without unitname will stay > allowed [0], especially as uboot or other bootloaders may expect such a > node to insert the actual amount of memory into it. > > Looking at uboot, fdt_fixup_memory_banks seems to look explicitly for a > "memory" node, so I'm actually not sure, if this is safe to keep at all. so after pondering this some more, I decided to drop this change again. /memory will stay allowed and might produce less issues with bootloaders touching the memory values. > [0] http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg494038.html