On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 02:14:33PM +0200, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> The skeleton.dtsi file was removed in ARM64 for different reasons as
> explained in commit ("3ebee5a2e141 arm64: dts: kill skeleton.dtsi").
>
> These also applies to ARM and it will also allow to get rid of the
> following DTC warnings in the future:
>
> "Node /memory has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name"
>
> But these boards don't have a memory node defined, so removing the
> skeleton.dtsi inclusion in exynos4.dtsi will cause a change in the
> compiled DTB. Add a dummy memory node so the compiled DTB doesn't
> change if the skeleton.dtsi is removed from exynos4.dtsi.
You mean extnos5440.dtsi?
>
> Eventually the correct starting addresses and sizes should be used
> but I didn't find that information.
>
> Signed-off-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <jav...@osg.samsung.com>
> ---
>
> arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5440-sd5v1.dts | 5 +++++
> arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5440-ssdk5440.dts | 5 +++++
> 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5440-sd5v1.dts
> b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5440-sd5v1.dts
> index a98501bab6fc..333db4ff373a 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5440-sd5v1.dts
> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5440-sd5v1.dts
> @@ -20,6 +20,11 @@
> bootargs = "root=/dev/sda2 rw rootwait ignore_loglevel
> earlyprintk no_console_suspend mem=2048M@0x80000000 mem=6144M@0x100000000
> console=ttySAC0,115200";
> };
>
> + memory {
> + device_type = "memory";
> + reg = <0 0>;
> + };
> +
> fixed-rate-clocks {
> xtal {
> compatible = "samsung,clock-xtal";
> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5440-ssdk5440.dts
> b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5440-ssdk5440.dts
> index 6a0d802e87c8..82fea6f94704 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5440-ssdk5440.dts
> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5440-ssdk5440.dts
> @@ -21,6 +21,11 @@
> bootargs = "root=/dev/sda2 rw rootwait ignore_loglevel
> earlyprintk no_console_suspend mem=2048M@0x80000000 mem=6144M@0x100000000
> console=ttySAC0,115200";
> };
>
> + memory {
> + device_type = "memory";
> + reg = <0 0>;
> + };
This looks okay, but the default size and address cells won't be
present. Won't that be a problem?
Best regards,
Krzysztof
