From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932708AbaKMLPx (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Nov 2014 06:15:53 -0500 Received: from mout.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.131]:58674 "EHLO mout.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932364AbaKMLPv (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Nov 2014 06:15:51 -0500 From: Arnd Bergmann To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Cc: Peter Griffin , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, maxime.coquelin@st.com, srinivas.kandagatla@gmail.com, patrice.chotard@st.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, lee.jones@linaro.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 13/14] ARM: STi: DT: STiH410: Add usb2 picophy dt nodes Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2014 12:15:35 +0100 Message-ID: <3348806.YN8XP4V4uc@wuerfel> User-Agent: KMail/4.11.5 (Linux/3.16.0-10-generic; KDE/4.11.5; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <1415876417-28728-14-git-send-email-peter.griffin@linaro.org> References: <1415876417-28728-1-git-send-email-peter.griffin@linaro.org> <1415876417-28728-14-git-send-email-peter.griffin@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:UJKRHJnSg5XxoC7eDXP8OpubSeLQewfMgXGujxKFhlV 4wo/RTBerr15qxLECqaM+YS87WrdPGnJgn64Cfdq52W/Z7DxD0 cEAuUM8hP1SbVV6AZWosYV5oq3aM1ZcfU3E35LB0s/vVT9vexM 2feMW694u75VgvukWmzO0n1K+0/iLONCBD+2W4lLQDbxg0XR8B pxpaXWKLBcynTkYPqHtIrI4yn+hMksCqlMH5Hfz8auGVG2f51c xW4gQuEFmyVbgBw7KIPea2jJnmMv5RgsdQTthhRlFhKwZem7tO 412yCom+bJUCbjPCBOZ5rHEONRVablA8U8E+fdwxKDlED7q/g7 YcUzPB+kgxA4X4TVAeEc= X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1; Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thursday 13 November 2014 11:00:16 Peter Griffin wrote: > + soc { > + usb2_picophy0: usbpicophy@0 { > + compatible = "st,stih407-usb2-phy"; > + reg = <0xf8 0x04>, /* syscfg 5062 */ > + <0xf4 0x04>; /* syscfg 5061 */ > I think the node name for the phy should be "phy@f8" instead of usbpicophy@0 by common convention. I notice that there are some existing instances of this, you can probably change them as well. Linux doesn't normally care about the node names. It also seems that you have put the node in the wrong place, as the reg property apparently refers to a different address space. Did you mean to put this under the syscfg_core node? Arnd