Hello Pavel,

Am 17.04.2016 um 23:55 schrieb Pavel Machek:
Hi!

Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/usbphy@0 has a unit name,
  but no reg property

I don't know who produces the warnings, but perhaps fix the tool,
instead?

This warnigns poping up with new DTC compilers, introduced from dtc
commit:

commit c9d9121683b35281239305e15adddfff2b462cf9
Author: Stephen Warren <swar...@nvidia.com>
Date:   Fri Feb 19 15:59:29 2016 +1100

    Warn on node name unit-address presence/absence mismatch

    ePAPR 1.1 section 2.2.1.1 "Node Name Requirements" specifies that any
    node that has a reg property must include a unit address in its name
    with value matching the first entry in its reg property. Conversely, if
    a node does not have a reg property, the node name must not include a
    unit address. Also allow ranges property as it is deemed valid, but ePAPR
    is not clear about it.

    Implement a check for this. The code doesn't validate the format of the
    unit address; ePAPR implies this may vary from (containing bus) binding
    to binding, so doing so would be much more complex.

So, the DTS are wrong, and need fixing ...

@@ -9,5 +9,5 @@
        #size-cells = <1>;
        chosen { };
        aliases { };
-       memory { device_type = "memory"; reg = <0 0>; };
+       memory@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@40 {
                                                #address-cells = <1>;
                                                #size-cells = <0>;
                                                #clock-cells = <0>;
@@ -136,7 +136,7 @@
                                                clocks = <&osc1>;
                                                reg = <0x40>;

-                                               mpuclk: mpuclk {
+                                               mpuclk: mpuclk@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?

see commit message ...

@@ -742,7 +742,7 @@
                        reg = <0xffd05000 0x1000>;
                };

-               usbphy0: usbphy@0 {
+               usbphy0: usbphy {
                        #phy-cells = <0>;
                        compatible = "usb-nop-xceiv";
                        status = "okay";

And this sounds like a bug waiting to happen..

Better fix would be to add the reg property .. could you help me?

bye,
Heiko
--
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,      Managing Director: Wolfgang Denk
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Reply via email to