From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pavel Machek Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2016 23:55:04 +0200 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] arm: dts: socfpga: fix DTC unit name warnings In-Reply-To: <1460716862-21523-1-git-send-email-hs@denx.de> References: <1460716862-21523-1-git-send-email-hs@denx.de> Message-ID: <20160417215504.GB20337@amd> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Hi! > Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/usbphy at 0 has a unit name, > but no reg property I don't know who produces the warnings, but perhaps fix the tool, instead? > @@ -9,5 +9,5 @@ > #size-cells = <1>; > chosen { }; > aliases { }; > - memory { device_type = "memory"; reg = <0 0>; }; > + memory at 0 { device_type = "memory"; reg = <0 0>; }; > }; This does not look like an improvement to me... > @@ -128,7 +128,7 @@ > compatible = "fixed-clock"; > }; > > - main_pll: main_pll { > + main_pll: main_pll at 40 { > #address-cells = <1>; > #size-cells = <0>; > #clock-cells = <0>; > @@ -136,7 +136,7 @@ > clocks = <&osc1>; > reg = <0x40>; > > - mpuclk: mpuclk { > + mpuclk: mpuclk at 48 { > #clock-cells = <0>; > compatible = "altr,socfpga-perip-clk"; > clocks = <&main_pll>; Neither do these, actually. So we have clock at fixed addresses. Why is it wrong? > @@ -742,7 +742,7 @@ > reg = <0xffd05000 0x1000>; > }; > > - usbphy0: usbphy at 0 { > + usbphy0: usbphy { > #phy-cells = <0>; > compatible = "usb-nop-xceiv"; > status = "okay"; And this sounds like a bug waiting to happen.. Best regards, Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html