Re: [PATCH v2 18/21] MIPS: mobileye: Add EyeQ5 dtsi

[Gregory CLEMENT <gregory.clement@bootlin.com>]

Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> writes:

> On 23/11/2023 16:26, Gregory CLEMENT wrote:
>> Add a device tree include file for the Mobileye EyeQ5 SoC.
>> 
>> Based on the work of Slava Samsonov <stanislav.samsonov@intel.com>
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Gregory CLEMENT <gregory.clement@bootlin.com>
>> ---
>
>
>> +	aliases {
>> +		serial0 = &uart0;
>> +		serial1 = &uart1;
>> +		serial2 = &uart2;
>> +	};
>> +
>> +	cpu_intc: interrupt-controller {
>> +		compatible = "mti,cpu-interrupt-controller";
>> +		interrupt-controller;
>> +		#address-cells = <0>;
>> +		#interrupt-cells = <1>;
>> +	};
>> +
>> +	gic: interrupt-controller@140000 {
>
> Why do you put MMIO nodes in top-level?

I can move it back under the soc node I think

>
>> +		compatible = "mti,gic";
>> +		reg = <0x0 0x140000 0x0 0x20000>;
>> +		interrupt-controller;
>> +		#interrupt-cells = <3>;
>> +
>> +		/*
>> +		* Declare the interrupt-parent even though the mti,gic
>> +		* binding doesn't require it, such that the kernel can
>> +		* figure out that cpu_intc is the root interrupt
>> +		* controller & should be probed first.
>> +		*/
>> +		interrupt-parent = <&cpu_intc>;
>> +
>> +		timer {
>> +			compatible = "mti,gic-timer";
>> +			interrupts = <GIC_LOCAL 1 IRQ_TYPE_NONE>;
>> +			clocks = <&core0_clk>;
>> +		};
>> +	};
>> +
>> +	soc: soc {
>
> Are you sure dtbs_check W=1 does not complain? I think you miss here
> address.

Yes dtbs_check W=1 does not complain. There is no reg property in this
node, so there is no address to add to the name of the node.

Gregory

-- 
Gregory Clement, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
http://bootlin.com