From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: suzuki.poulose@arm.com (Suzuki K Poulose) Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2018 18:30:06 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 11/11] dts: tc2: Update coresight bindings for hardware ports In-Reply-To: <9cf11b0c-b5c0-b39d-8c57-ad7aea5c6212@arm.com> References: <1536661032-30481-1-git-send-email-suzuki.poulose@arm.com> <1536661032-30481-12-git-send-email-suzuki.poulose@arm.com> <20180911170113.GA27663@e107155-lin> <9cf11b0c-b5c0-b39d-8c57-ad7aea5c6212@arm.com> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 09/11/2018 06:23 PM, Sudeep Holla wrote: > > > On 11/09/18 18:15, Suzuki K Poulose wrote: >> On 09/11/2018 06:01 PM, Sudeep Holla wrote: >>> On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 11:17:12AM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote: >>>> Switch to the new coresight bindings >>>> >>> >>> I still see the below warnings: >>> >>> vexpress-v2p-ca15_a7.dtb: Warning (graph_child_address): >>> ????/replicator/in-ports: graph node has single child node 'port at 0', >>> ????#address-cells/#size-cells are not necessary >>> vexpress-v2p-ca15_a7.dtb: Warning (graph_child_address): >>> ????/funnel at 20040000/out-ports: graph node has single child node >>> 'port at 0', >>> ????#address-cells/#size-cells are not necessary >>> >>> I need the below patch to fix them, let me know if it looks OK, I can >>> amend and apply. >> >> Thanks for reporting. I purposefully added the "address-cells" and >> followed the format everywhere in the series thinking that, that is >> indeed the formal way of doing it, rather than having implicit port >> numbers. I can send an updated series fixing it everywhere. >> > No need to post the update for TC2 unless it's different from what I > have proposed. > Yes, the changes look good. Thanks Sudeep. I will drop this patch from the next version then. Btw, my kernel build didn't trigger those warnings. Thanks Suzuki