On 11/11/2012 11:27 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 11 November 2012 19:42, Rob Herring <robherri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 11/06/2012 10:22 PM, viresh kumar wrote:
>
>>> cluster0: cluster@0 {
>>> + data1 = <0x50 0x60 0x70>;
>>> + data2 = <0x5000 0x6000 0x7000>;
>>> + data3 = <0x50000000 0x60000000 0x70000000>;
>>
>> So there is a mismatch in our assumptions. You are just truncating
>> 32-bit values. I assumed you were using the 8 and 16 bit sizes that are
>> now supported in dts. I don't think we should just truncate values
>> blindly. We have support for specifying 8 and 16 values now so you
>> should use that and define that as part of a binding.
>
> Sorry couldn't get your point at all :(
> What did you mean by "truncating 32 bit values" and how should we
> tell via DT, that the value passed is 8 bit, 16 bit or 32 bit?
>
You are trying to retrieve an array of 8 or 16-bit values which are
stored as 32-bit values in dtb. Why not define them in the binding as 8
or 16 bit to begin with. Then there is never any ambiguity about their size.
I don't think the size is stored in the dtb. It is only in the dts. You
need to define the size in the binding definitions and use '/bits/'
annotation. With this the data is packed. Then the array function used
should match what the binding defines.
Rob
_______________________________________________
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
