From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Javier Martinez Canillas Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] arm64: dts: exynos: Add missing unit name to Exynos7 SoC node Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2017 11:00:50 -0300 Message-ID: <33321d4d-645b-d29a-41dc-c5608cd9d096@osg.samsung.com> References: <1484069912-6534-1-git-send-email-javier@osg.samsung.com> <1484069912-6534-2-git-send-email-javier@osg.samsung.com> <20170110184728.2nff4r634ics4wb3@kozik-lap> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: devicetree-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Rob Herring Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski , linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Andi Shyti , Chanwoo Choi , devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Kukjin Kim , Catalin Marinas , linux-samsung-soc-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Will Deacon , Mark Rutland , linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org Hello Rob, On 01/10/2017 04:55 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: > Hello Krzysztof, > > On 01/10/2017 03:47 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 02:38:30PM -0300, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: >>> This patch fixes the following DTC warning about a mismatch >>> between a device node reg property and its unit name: >>> >>> Node /soc has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Javier Martinez Canillas >>> --- >>> >>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos7.dtsi | 2 +- >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos7.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos7.dtsi >>> index 80aa60e38237..0d2fedc6ac2f 100644 >>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos7.dtsi >>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos7.dtsi >>> @@ -69,7 +69,7 @@ >>> method = "smc"; >>> }; >>> >>> - soc: soc { >>> + soc: soc@0 { >> >> This looks unnatural, like a fix just to silence the DTC. Mostly de do >> not enumerate soc node, although there are few exceptions. >> > > Yes, but OTOH arm32 Exynos SoCs just have an empty "ranges" property in their > soc device node (parent and child address space is the same, no translation) > so DTC doesn't complain about the unit address in those. > > But others SoCs DTSI with a non-empty ranges property have an unit name in > their soc nodes, i.e for arm64 and arm32: > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/marvell/berlin4ct.dtsi > > arch/arm/boot/dts/da850.dtsi > >> I would prefer ignore the warning... however I am happy to hear other opinions. >> > > If is wrong/unnatural to have addresses for soc nodes then I think DTC should > be patched to ignore these (like it will be the case for the OPP nodes AFAIU). > Any comments about this? >> Best regards, >> Krzysztof >> > > Best regards, > Best regards, -- Javier Martinez Canillas Open Source Group Samsung Research America -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html