From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from bali.collaboradmins.com (bali.collaboradmins.com [148.251.105.195]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E8C9319870; Mon, 23 Feb 2026 17:19:40 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.251.105.195 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1771867181; cv=none; b=Y6QEmpwioy+3ELz8RVIWvBbFXY13cp9sEvRpXJvlcfVr0C0UyadvHjjUt187+LmerJRLWu+D898aneSXUBNhk1RuPSQQXTnmREIWgeXxFX1zu6ZC7EA/F+xWYZqrg1t2utyYCPtDjT02Utld5mwVV1JWRKX0kLDX8onmJg93o8o= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1771867181; c=relaxed/simple; bh=K21kjy9qzrF9ypXG7rQNvPH2O306QauFy/abdov4/ag=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=Qmhq9/ArKVFDrMStDtxDxMb7j0XKileweOJjFlBIQHf2MaVuxZkraLb2D+tP8pL8w11ipYVtVmJ4y3eRwE/I1i2bwibzgkAPu8wiObJLB5igvBJDM2vPz4Lco0917BX2IWeDG/iEvwu0yivXMyKBQOvJlTZN2OdBYfuudGNDuJ8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=collabora.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=collabora.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=collabora.com header.i=@collabora.com header.b=BsXDftef; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.251.105.195 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=collabora.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=collabora.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=collabora.com header.i=@collabora.com header.b="BsXDftef" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=collabora.com; s=mail; t=1771867178; bh=K21kjy9qzrF9ypXG7rQNvPH2O306QauFy/abdov4/ag=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=BsXDftefiIPUo9wBEuCnGW+eH0sGWoHtFskViUB2WUIk7UeGUDEwdN37H2Dx8hAqw VSt5oHBb94OLuZb7p+Kp30EalU9tKFKhrdxna+uT0/w7jhLR1j6ZJD6SPXB9JyT8b1 Lzdzp9m7Z1wbQrZ4P7PnCvsWLNI7U1njaKVNARQtslKNW5Z8JvhHnsdJMA5bMjkDu4 B3SSFhrUvj/UIFMdzhuwXHg0hXhgmQfJ6vMvhRXrOyaTSsNZEJoz00cNYHTLY270dL iB48v4ED6+xIJElC1oS1M2km1gQaGOMGUdhMDLHdtyhAwBCe0O8qaXmeyoi6WB2wqN wayFEyy6Uo1Lg== Received: from [192.168.1.90] (unknown [86.123.23.225]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: cristicc) by bali.collaboradmins.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 66D6B17E041C; Mon, 23 Feb 2026 18:19:38 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <39f493a6-fd98-4cf6-9991-334ab4ddbbf8@collabora.com> Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2026 19:19:37 +0200 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: rockchip: Fix vdec register blocks order on RK3576 To: Nicolas Dufresne , Rob Herring , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Conor Dooley , Heiko Stuebner , Detlev Casanova Cc: kernel@collabora.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20260223-vdec-reg-order-rk3576-v1-1-560976566bd3@collabora.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Cristian Ciocaltea In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi Nicolas, On 2/23/26 4:51 PM, Nicolas Dufresne wrote: > Hi Cristian, > > Le lundi 23 février 2026 à 14:25 +0200, Cristian Ciocaltea a écrit : >> When building device trees for the RK3576 based boards, DTC shows the >> following complaint: >> >> rk3576.dtsi:1282.30-1304.5: Warning (simple_bus_reg): >> /soc/video-codec@27b00000: simple-bus unit address format error, expected >> "27b00100" >> >> Provide the register blocks in the expected address-based order. >> >> Fixes: da0de806d8b4 ("arm64: dts: rockchip: Add the vdpu383 Video Decoder on >> rk3576") >> Signed-off-by: Cristian Ciocaltea >> --- >> arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3576.dtsi | 6 +++--- >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3576.dtsi >> b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3576.dtsi >> index 49ccdf12ef7e..45eb0d053a6f 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3576.dtsi >> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3576.dtsi >> @@ -1281,10 +1281,10 @@ gpu: gpu@27800000 { >> >> vdec: video-codec@27b00000 { >> compatible = "rockchip,rk3576-vdec"; >> - reg = <0x0 0x27b00100 0x0 0x500>, >> - <0x0 0x27b00000 0x0 0x100>, >> + reg = <0x0 0x27b00000 0x0 0x100>, >> + <0x0 0x27b00100 0x0 0x500>, >> <0x0 0x27b00600 0x0 0x100>; >> - reg-names = "function", "link", "cache"; >> + reg-names = "link", "function", "cache"; > > I have a vague memory it was done on purpose, due to the "items" in the bindings > requiring to follow the same order. I was not enable to run the DT checks today > (some pythonic version miss-match issue), but wanted to raise the flag. As I mentioned in my previous reply, I think we should change the binding to allow using the correct order. Thanks, cristian