From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F231C76186 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 18:43:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 477A02173B for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 18:43:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linaro.org header.i=@linaro.org header.b="Ek1BINi7" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728477AbfGXSnn (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Jul 2019 14:43:43 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-f196.google.com ([209.85.210.196]:38843 "EHLO mail-pf1-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726001AbfGXSnn (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Jul 2019 14:43:43 -0400 Received: by mail-pf1-f196.google.com with SMTP id y15so21380209pfn.5 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 11:43:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=qiU1TfBT/KK66R/TOLH5DkaauwA1Q2lRA1rBib8JZqo=; b=Ek1BINi7A7AhMjbtrG2l3eWV3rDIsxSJ7uaNLpNZrH2IMmmO2Uekvun1GK8CJiTCnh Me3Czt/+vvR8/SoH2HVlIjRTO9TQr7BXiZ50k3jrYhmh7kAcDk+icjL8VDghTfdY9Epc WUdyNQ+SFJbCJtDFJeHM/eM/DKweUy7/JWgZ/MfBEKZynUUg4NOB2TqrI+jSWjeOb4qt mxieuG0DTD3pcFUQV5GrEhwopopk4Io70FPuxsT8CbWMidQdjfk7iENHqYW8kfgtyZJk o9LOgtEfvLEAYGK1thWzXEY7mxJiVcE+WSU7prQV09eZyRX8QNEuuMa2oIM/YaVFN79m qQdQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=qiU1TfBT/KK66R/TOLH5DkaauwA1Q2lRA1rBib8JZqo=; b=RrYYRDWoEPE+pxBb6hiuRKdS1O4rr8Y/J7ISilTD4rhweHqsq6HwqQwufQGa+9i+gS 1TBVoYiEU8Ql/6LkVEpzYH4s1LNyzGRIkKghhbYjEzISnhxKwRaR8QZW9UdztmeeCZzu SVse+q20q5nATmfl5FubOaul53x9/IOfun3dI2ZyMJ7JgQTtCzBrpLraPLGNG3yfH/4j ngbtEkB0voCEmfUQlVwafORswk2OnpaugpZFduSGDnr6lydATMp7n03gVBMasLNVTOR3 PXWN0krveI1DKY4Yj0MlLLexRI3JqQlx/V46eEQdXTz5RA9YYW1pQRGracmHJJVSQ9rM iJHQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAV1X3dlEiB6G3bKnYj7ootltfrjeW9Zi2sToa84C7eAOldnlStD Ctwpocudx7HmdjO1a6ekPsq9YA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwZ1wGRNPflbmAAPHX2GTDlZb9Q2mKbFReCTbmwBkJ7MwJlzjjPqV2xROXE1gpvPpzze7UpKw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:20a2:: with SMTP id f31mr88160029pjg.90.1563993822260; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 11:43:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tuxbook-pro (104-188-17-28.lightspeed.sndgca.sbcglobal.net. [104.188.17.28]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p68sm58404643pfb.80.2019.07.24.11.43.41 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=AEAD-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 24 Jul 2019 11:43:41 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2019 11:45:07 -0700 From: Bjorn Andersson To: Marc Gonzalez Cc: Jeffrey Hugo , Andy Gross , Rob Herring , Mark Rutland , MSM , DT , LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: qcom: msm8998: Node ordering, address cleanups Message-ID: <20190724184507.GN7234@tuxbook-pro> References: <20190722165823.21539-1-jeffrey.l.hugo@gmail.com> <2165bbd3-aa60-bec0-4ee7-dfb7dc1dd1ad@free.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2165bbd3-aa60-bec0-4ee7-dfb7dc1dd1ad@free.fr> User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.4 (2019-03-13) Sender: linux-arm-msm-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org On Wed 24 Jul 04:16 PDT 2019, Marc Gonzalez wrote: > On 22/07/2019 18:58, Jeffrey Hugo wrote: > > > DT nodes should be ordered by address, then node name, and finally label. > > The msm8998 dtsi does not follow this, so clean it up by reordering the > > nodes. While we are at it, extend the addresses to be fully 32-bits wide > > so that ordering is easy to determine when adding new nodes. Also, two > > or so nodes had the wrong address value in their node name (did not match > > the reg property), so fix those up as well. > > > > Hopefully going forward, things can be maintained so that a cleanup like > > this is not needed. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jeffrey Hugo > > --- > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8998.dtsi | 254 +++++++++++++------------- > > 1 file changed, 127 insertions(+), 127 deletions(-) > > LGTM. > > Reviewed-by: Marc Gonzalez > > Rob, Mark: when there are multiple reg properties, why is the convention > to use the *first* address in the node's name, rather than the lowest > address? > Per the ePAPR (section 2.2.1 Node Names of v1.1): "The unit-address must match the first address specified in the reg property of the node". Regards, Bjorn > e.g. > > spmi_bus: spmi@800f000 { > compatible = "qcom,spmi-pmic-arb"; > reg = <0x0800f000 0x1000>, > <0x08400000 0x1000000>, > <0x09400000 0x1000000>, > <0x0a400000 0x220000>, > <0x0800a000 0x3000>; > reg-names = "core", "chnls", "obsrvr", "intr", "cnfg"; > > "spmi@800f000" instead of "spmi@800a000" > > Especially, since the reg props could be in any order here, given the > lookup by name. > > Regards.