* Recommended notation for OPP to avoid DTC warnings
@ 2017-02-26 5:18 ` Masahiro Yamada
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Masahiro Yamada @ 2017-02-26 5:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Viresh Kumar, Rob Herring, linux-pm, devicetree, Mark Rutland
Cc: masahiroy, linux-arm-kernel, Linux Kernel Mailing List
Hi.
Decumentation/devicetree/bindings/opp/opp.txt
takes examples like this:
opp@1000000000 {
opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1000000000>;
opp-microvolt = <970000 975000 985000>;
opp-microamp = <70000>;
clock-latency-ns = <300000>;
opp-suspend;
};
opp@1100000000 {
opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1100000000>;
opp-microvolt = <980000 1000000 1010000>;
opp-microamp = <80000>;
clock-latency-ns = <310000>;
};
opp@1200000000 {
opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1200000000>;
opp-microvolt = <1025000>;
clock-latency-ns = <290000>;
turbo-mode;
};
If we follow this notation and the device-tree is built with W=1,
DTC warns like follows:
Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /opp_table0/opp@1000000000 has a
unit name, but no reg property
Is there a recommended notation to avoid it?
Maybe, simply omit the "@" ?
--
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Recommended notation for OPP to avoid DTC warnings
@ 2017-02-26 5:18 ` Masahiro Yamada
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Masahiro Yamada @ 2017-02-26 5:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Viresh Kumar, Rob Herring, linux-pm, devicetree, Mark Rutland
Cc: masahiroy, Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-arm-kernel
Hi.
Decumentation/devicetree/bindings/opp/opp.txt
takes examples like this:
opp@1000000000 {
opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1000000000>;
opp-microvolt = <970000 975000 985000>;
opp-microamp = <70000>;
clock-latency-ns = <300000>;
opp-suspend;
};
opp@1100000000 {
opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1100000000>;
opp-microvolt = <980000 1000000 1010000>;
opp-microamp = <80000>;
clock-latency-ns = <310000>;
};
opp@1200000000 {
opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1200000000>;
opp-microvolt = <1025000>;
clock-latency-ns = <290000>;
turbo-mode;
};
If we follow this notation and the device-tree is built with W=1,
DTC warns like follows:
Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /opp_table0/opp@1000000000 has a
unit name, but no reg property
Is there a recommended notation to avoid it?
Maybe, simply omit the "@" ?
--
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Recommended notation for OPP to avoid DTC warnings
@ 2017-02-26 5:18 ` Masahiro Yamada
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Masahiro Yamada @ 2017-02-26 5:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
Hi.
Decumentation/devicetree/bindings/opp/opp.txt
takes examples like this:
opp at 1000000000 {
opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1000000000>;
opp-microvolt = <970000 975000 985000>;
opp-microamp = <70000>;
clock-latency-ns = <300000>;
opp-suspend;
};
opp at 1100000000 {
opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1100000000>;
opp-microvolt = <980000 1000000 1010000>;
opp-microamp = <80000>;
clock-latency-ns = <310000>;
};
opp at 1200000000 {
opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1200000000>;
opp-microvolt = <1025000>;
clock-latency-ns = <290000>;
turbo-mode;
};
If we follow this notation and the device-tree is built with W=1,
DTC warns like follows:
Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /opp_table0/opp at 1000000000 has a
unit name, but no reg property
Is there a recommended notation to avoid it?
Maybe, simply omit the "@" ?
--
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Recommended notation for OPP to avoid DTC warnings
2017-02-26 5:18 ` Masahiro Yamada
(?)
@ 2017-02-27 3:42 ` Viresh Kumar
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Viresh Kumar @ 2017-02-27 3:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Masahiro Yamada
Cc: Rob Herring, linux-pm, devicetree, Mark Rutland, masahiroy,
linux-arm-kernel, Linux Kernel Mailing List
On 26-02-17, 14:18, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> Hi.
>
>
> Decumentation/devicetree/bindings/opp/opp.txt
> takes examples like this:
>
> opp@1000000000 {
> opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1000000000>;
> opp-microvolt = <970000 975000 985000>;
> opp-microamp = <70000>;
> clock-latency-ns = <300000>;
> opp-suspend;
> };
> opp@1100000000 {
> opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1100000000>;
> opp-microvolt = <980000 1000000 1010000>;
> opp-microamp = <80000>;
> clock-latency-ns = <310000>;
> };
> opp@1200000000 {
> opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1200000000>;
> opp-microvolt = <1025000>;
> clock-latency-ns = <290000>;
> turbo-mode;
> };
>
>
> If we follow this notation and the device-tree is built with W=1,
> DTC warns like follows:
>
>
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /opp_table0/opp@1000000000 has a
> unit name, but no reg property
>
>
> Is there a recommended notation to avoid it?
>
> Maybe, simply omit the "@" ?
I would let Rob suggest something here.
--
viresh
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Recommended notation for OPP to avoid DTC warnings
@ 2017-02-27 3:42 ` Viresh Kumar
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Viresh Kumar @ 2017-02-27 3:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Masahiro Yamada
Cc: Mark Rutland, devicetree, linux-pm, masahiroy,
Linux Kernel Mailing List, Rob Herring, linux-arm-kernel
On 26-02-17, 14:18, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> Hi.
>
>
> Decumentation/devicetree/bindings/opp/opp.txt
> takes examples like this:
>
> opp@1000000000 {
> opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1000000000>;
> opp-microvolt = <970000 975000 985000>;
> opp-microamp = <70000>;
> clock-latency-ns = <300000>;
> opp-suspend;
> };
> opp@1100000000 {
> opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1100000000>;
> opp-microvolt = <980000 1000000 1010000>;
> opp-microamp = <80000>;
> clock-latency-ns = <310000>;
> };
> opp@1200000000 {
> opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1200000000>;
> opp-microvolt = <1025000>;
> clock-latency-ns = <290000>;
> turbo-mode;
> };
>
>
> If we follow this notation and the device-tree is built with W=1,
> DTC warns like follows:
>
>
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /opp_table0/opp@1000000000 has a
> unit name, but no reg property
>
>
> Is there a recommended notation to avoid it?
>
> Maybe, simply omit the "@" ?
I would let Rob suggest something here.
--
viresh
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Recommended notation for OPP to avoid DTC warnings
@ 2017-02-27 3:42 ` Viresh Kumar
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Viresh Kumar @ 2017-02-27 3:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On 26-02-17, 14:18, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> Hi.
>
>
> Decumentation/devicetree/bindings/opp/opp.txt
> takes examples like this:
>
> opp at 1000000000 {
> opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1000000000>;
> opp-microvolt = <970000 975000 985000>;
> opp-microamp = <70000>;
> clock-latency-ns = <300000>;
> opp-suspend;
> };
> opp at 1100000000 {
> opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1100000000>;
> opp-microvolt = <980000 1000000 1010000>;
> opp-microamp = <80000>;
> clock-latency-ns = <310000>;
> };
> opp at 1200000000 {
> opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1200000000>;
> opp-microvolt = <1025000>;
> clock-latency-ns = <290000>;
> turbo-mode;
> };
>
>
> If we follow this notation and the device-tree is built with W=1,
> DTC warns like follows:
>
>
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /opp_table0/opp at 1000000000 has a
> unit name, but no reg property
>
>
> Is there a recommended notation to avoid it?
>
> Maybe, simply omit the "@" ?
I would let Rob suggest something here.
--
viresh
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Recommended notation for OPP to avoid DTC warnings
2017-02-26 5:18 ` Masahiro Yamada
(?)
@ 2017-02-27 10:44 ` Mark Rutland
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Mark Rutland @ 2017-02-27 10:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Masahiro Yamada
Cc: Viresh Kumar, Rob Herring, linux-pm, devicetree, masahiroy,
linux-arm-kernel, Linux Kernel Mailing List
On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 02:18:03PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> Hi.
>
>
> Decumentation/devicetree/bindings/opp/opp.txt
> takes examples like this:
>
> opp@1000000000 {
> opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1000000000>;
> opp-microvolt = <970000 975000 985000>;
> opp-microamp = <70000>;
> clock-latency-ns = <300000>;
> opp-suspend;
> };
> If we follow this notation and the device-tree is built with W=1,
> DTC warns like follows:
>
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /opp_table0/opp@1000000000 has a
> unit name, but no reg property
>
> Is there a recommended notation to avoid it?
>
> Maybe, simply omit the "@" ?
I think just s/@/-/ should be fine, e.g. call the above opp-1000000000.
Thanks,
Mark.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Recommended notation for OPP to avoid DTC warnings
@ 2017-02-27 10:44 ` Mark Rutland
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Mark Rutland @ 2017-02-27 10:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Masahiro Yamada
Cc: devicetree, linux-pm, Viresh Kumar, masahiroy,
Linux Kernel Mailing List, Rob Herring, linux-arm-kernel
On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 02:18:03PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> Hi.
>
>
> Decumentation/devicetree/bindings/opp/opp.txt
> takes examples like this:
>
> opp@1000000000 {
> opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1000000000>;
> opp-microvolt = <970000 975000 985000>;
> opp-microamp = <70000>;
> clock-latency-ns = <300000>;
> opp-suspend;
> };
> If we follow this notation and the device-tree is built with W=1,
> DTC warns like follows:
>
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /opp_table0/opp@1000000000 has a
> unit name, but no reg property
>
> Is there a recommended notation to avoid it?
>
> Maybe, simply omit the "@" ?
I think just s/@/-/ should be fine, e.g. call the above opp-1000000000.
Thanks,
Mark.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Recommended notation for OPP to avoid DTC warnings
@ 2017-02-27 10:44 ` Mark Rutland
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Mark Rutland @ 2017-02-27 10:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 02:18:03PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> Hi.
>
>
> Decumentation/devicetree/bindings/opp/opp.txt
> takes examples like this:
>
> opp at 1000000000 {
> opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1000000000>;
> opp-microvolt = <970000 975000 985000>;
> opp-microamp = <70000>;
> clock-latency-ns = <300000>;
> opp-suspend;
> };
> If we follow this notation and the device-tree is built with W=1,
> DTC warns like follows:
>
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /opp_table0/opp at 1000000000 has a
> unit name, but no reg property
>
> Is there a recommended notation to avoid it?
>
> Maybe, simply omit the "@" ?
I think just s/@/-/ should be fine, e.g. call the above opp-1000000000.
Thanks,
Mark.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Recommended notation for OPP to avoid DTC warnings
2017-02-27 10:44 ` Mark Rutland
(?)
@ 2017-02-27 10:55 ` Viresh Kumar
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Viresh Kumar @ 2017-02-27 10:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mark Rutland
Cc: Masahiro Yamada, Rob Herring, linux-pm, devicetree, masahiroy,
linux-arm-kernel, Linux Kernel Mailing List
On 27-02-17, 10:44, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 02:18:03PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> > Hi.
> >
> >
> > Decumentation/devicetree/bindings/opp/opp.txt
> > takes examples like this:
> >
> > opp@1000000000 {
> > opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1000000000>;
> > opp-microvolt = <970000 975000 985000>;
> > opp-microamp = <70000>;
> > clock-latency-ns = <300000>;
> > opp-suspend;
> > };
>
> > If we follow this notation and the device-tree is built with W=1,
> > DTC warns like follows:
> >
> > Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /opp_table0/opp@1000000000 has a
> > unit name, but no reg property
> >
> > Is there a recommended notation to avoid it?
> >
> > Maybe, simply omit the "@" ?
>
> I think just s/@/-/ should be fine, e.g. call the above opp-1000000000.
That's fine with me. I can send a patch to fix all existing users if we all
agree for it.
--
viresh
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Recommended notation for OPP to avoid DTC warnings
@ 2017-02-27 10:55 ` Viresh Kumar
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Viresh Kumar @ 2017-02-27 10:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mark Rutland
Cc: devicetree, linux-pm, masahiroy, Linux Kernel Mailing List,
Masahiro Yamada, Rob Herring, linux-arm-kernel
On 27-02-17, 10:44, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 02:18:03PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> > Hi.
> >
> >
> > Decumentation/devicetree/bindings/opp/opp.txt
> > takes examples like this:
> >
> > opp@1000000000 {
> > opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1000000000>;
> > opp-microvolt = <970000 975000 985000>;
> > opp-microamp = <70000>;
> > clock-latency-ns = <300000>;
> > opp-suspend;
> > };
>
> > If we follow this notation and the device-tree is built with W=1,
> > DTC warns like follows:
> >
> > Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /opp_table0/opp@1000000000 has a
> > unit name, but no reg property
> >
> > Is there a recommended notation to avoid it?
> >
> > Maybe, simply omit the "@" ?
>
> I think just s/@/-/ should be fine, e.g. call the above opp-1000000000.
That's fine with me. I can send a patch to fix all existing users if we all
agree for it.
--
viresh
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Recommended notation for OPP to avoid DTC warnings
@ 2017-02-27 10:55 ` Viresh Kumar
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Viresh Kumar @ 2017-02-27 10:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On 27-02-17, 10:44, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 02:18:03PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> > Hi.
> >
> >
> > Decumentation/devicetree/bindings/opp/opp.txt
> > takes examples like this:
> >
> > opp at 1000000000 {
> > opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1000000000>;
> > opp-microvolt = <970000 975000 985000>;
> > opp-microamp = <70000>;
> > clock-latency-ns = <300000>;
> > opp-suspend;
> > };
>
> > If we follow this notation and the device-tree is built with W=1,
> > DTC warns like follows:
> >
> > Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /opp_table0/opp at 1000000000 has a
> > unit name, but no reg property
> >
> > Is there a recommended notation to avoid it?
> >
> > Maybe, simply omit the "@" ?
>
> I think just s/@/-/ should be fine, e.g. call the above opp-1000000000.
That's fine with me. I can send a patch to fix all existing users if we all
agree for it.
--
viresh
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Recommended notation for OPP to avoid DTC warnings
2017-02-27 10:55 ` Viresh Kumar
@ 2017-02-27 10:58 ` Masahiro Yamada
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Masahiro Yamada @ 2017-02-27 10:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Viresh Kumar
Cc: Mark Rutland, Rob Herring, linux-pm, devicetree,
linux-arm-kernel, Linux Kernel Mailing List
2017-02-27 19:55 GMT+09:00 Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>:
> On 27-02-17, 10:44, Mark Rutland wrote:
>> On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 02:18:03PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
>> > Hi.
>> >
>> >
>> > Decumentation/devicetree/bindings/opp/opp.txt
>> > takes examples like this:
>> >
>> > opp@1000000000 {
>> > opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1000000000>;
>> > opp-microvolt = <970000 975000 985000>;
>> > opp-microamp = <70000>;
>> > clock-latency-ns = <300000>;
>> > opp-suspend;
>> > };
>>
>> > If we follow this notation and the device-tree is built with W=1,
>> > DTC warns like follows:
>> >
>> > Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /opp_table0/opp@1000000000 has a
>> > unit name, but no reg property
>> >
>> > Is there a recommended notation to avoid it?
>> >
>> > Maybe, simply omit the "@" ?
>>
>> I think just s/@/-/ should be fine, e.g. call the above opp-1000000000.
>
> That's fine with me. I can send a patch to fix all existing users if we all
> agree for it.
OK with me.
Also, please remember to update the examples
in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/opp/opp.txt
--
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Recommended notation for OPP to avoid DTC warnings
@ 2017-02-27 10:58 ` Masahiro Yamada
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Masahiro Yamada @ 2017-02-27 10:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
2017-02-27 19:55 GMT+09:00 Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>:
> On 27-02-17, 10:44, Mark Rutland wrote:
>> On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 02:18:03PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
>> > Hi.
>> >
>> >
>> > Decumentation/devicetree/bindings/opp/opp.txt
>> > takes examples like this:
>> >
>> > opp at 1000000000 {
>> > opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1000000000>;
>> > opp-microvolt = <970000 975000 985000>;
>> > opp-microamp = <70000>;
>> > clock-latency-ns = <300000>;
>> > opp-suspend;
>> > };
>>
>> > If we follow this notation and the device-tree is built with W=1,
>> > DTC warns like follows:
>> >
>> > Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /opp_table0/opp at 1000000000 has a
>> > unit name, but no reg property
>> >
>> > Is there a recommended notation to avoid it?
>> >
>> > Maybe, simply omit the "@" ?
>>
>> I think just s/@/-/ should be fine, e.g. call the above opp-1000000000.
>
> That's fine with me. I can send a patch to fix all existing users if we all
> agree for it.
OK with me.
Also, please remember to update the examples
in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/opp/opp.txt
--
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Recommended notation for OPP to avoid DTC warnings
2017-02-27 10:55 ` Viresh Kumar
@ 2017-03-31 2:59 ` Masahiro Yamada
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Masahiro Yamada @ 2017-03-31 2:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Viresh Kumar
Cc: Mark Rutland, Rob Herring, linux-pm, devicetree,
linux-arm-kernel, Linux Kernel Mailing List
Hi.
2017-02-27 19:55 GMT+09:00 Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>:
> On 27-02-17, 10:44, Mark Rutland wrote:
>> On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 02:18:03PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
>> > Hi.
>> >
>> >
>> > Decumentation/devicetree/bindings/opp/opp.txt
>> > takes examples like this:
>> >
>> > opp@1000000000 {
>> > opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1000000000>;
>> > opp-microvolt = <970000 975000 985000>;
>> > opp-microamp = <70000>;
>> > clock-latency-ns = <300000>;
>> > opp-suspend;
>> > };
>>
>> > If we follow this notation and the device-tree is built with W=1,
>> > DTC warns like follows:
>> >
>> > Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /opp_table0/opp@1000000000 has a
>> > unit name, but no reg property
>> >
>> > Is there a recommended notation to avoid it?
>> >
>> > Maybe, simply omit the "@" ?
>>
>> I think just s/@/-/ should be fine, e.g. call the above opp-1000000000.
>
> That's fine with me. I can send a patch to fix all existing users if we all
> agree for it.
>
> --
> viresh
Any progress on this?
Did we reach on agreement with s/@/-/ ?
--
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Recommended notation for OPP to avoid DTC warnings
@ 2017-03-31 2:59 ` Masahiro Yamada
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Masahiro Yamada @ 2017-03-31 2:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
Hi.
2017-02-27 19:55 GMT+09:00 Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>:
> On 27-02-17, 10:44, Mark Rutland wrote:
>> On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 02:18:03PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
>> > Hi.
>> >
>> >
>> > Decumentation/devicetree/bindings/opp/opp.txt
>> > takes examples like this:
>> >
>> > opp at 1000000000 {
>> > opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1000000000>;
>> > opp-microvolt = <970000 975000 985000>;
>> > opp-microamp = <70000>;
>> > clock-latency-ns = <300000>;
>> > opp-suspend;
>> > };
>>
>> > If we follow this notation and the device-tree is built with W=1,
>> > DTC warns like follows:
>> >
>> > Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /opp_table0/opp at 1000000000 has a
>> > unit name, but no reg property
>> >
>> > Is there a recommended notation to avoid it?
>> >
>> > Maybe, simply omit the "@" ?
>>
>> I think just s/@/-/ should be fine, e.g. call the above opp-1000000000.
>
> That's fine with me. I can send a patch to fix all existing users if we all
> agree for it.
>
> --
> viresh
Any progress on this?
Did we reach on agreement with s/@/-/ ?
--
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: Recommended notation for OPP to avoid DTC warnings
2017-03-31 2:59 ` Masahiro Yamada
@ 2017-04-10 4:58 ` Viresh Kumar
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Viresh Kumar @ 2017-04-10 4:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Masahiro Yamada
Cc: Mark Rutland, Rob Herring, linux-pm, devicetree,
linux-arm-kernel, Linux Kernel Mailing List
On 31-03-17, 11:59, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> Hi.
>
> 2017-02-27 19:55 GMT+09:00 Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>:
> > On 27-02-17, 10:44, Mark Rutland wrote:
> >> On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 02:18:03PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> >> > Hi.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Decumentation/devicetree/bindings/opp/opp.txt
> >> > takes examples like this:
> >> >
> >> > opp@1000000000 {
> >> > opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1000000000>;
> >> > opp-microvolt = <970000 975000 985000>;
> >> > opp-microamp = <70000>;
> >> > clock-latency-ns = <300000>;
> >> > opp-suspend;
> >> > };
> >>
> >> > If we follow this notation and the device-tree is built with W=1,
> >> > DTC warns like follows:
> >> >
> >> > Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /opp_table0/opp@1000000000 has a
> >> > unit name, but no reg property
> >> >
> >> > Is there a recommended notation to avoid it?
> >> >
> >> > Maybe, simply omit the "@" ?
> >>
> >> I think just s/@/-/ should be fine, e.g. call the above opp-1000000000.
> >
> > That's fine with me. I can send a patch to fix all existing users if we all
> > agree for it.
> >
> > --
> > viresh
>
>
> Any progress on this?
>
> Did we reach on agreement with s/@/-/ ?
We can follow this as no one else objected. I will send a patch for existing
entries and you can do it for the newer ones.
--
viresh
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Recommended notation for OPP to avoid DTC warnings
@ 2017-04-10 4:58 ` Viresh Kumar
0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread
From: Viresh Kumar @ 2017-04-10 4:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On 31-03-17, 11:59, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> Hi.
>
> 2017-02-27 19:55 GMT+09:00 Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>:
> > On 27-02-17, 10:44, Mark Rutland wrote:
> >> On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 02:18:03PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> >> > Hi.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Decumentation/devicetree/bindings/opp/opp.txt
> >> > takes examples like this:
> >> >
> >> > opp at 1000000000 {
> >> > opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1000000000>;
> >> > opp-microvolt = <970000 975000 985000>;
> >> > opp-microamp = <70000>;
> >> > clock-latency-ns = <300000>;
> >> > opp-suspend;
> >> > };
> >>
> >> > If we follow this notation and the device-tree is built with W=1,
> >> > DTC warns like follows:
> >> >
> >> > Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /opp_table0/opp at 1000000000 has a
> >> > unit name, but no reg property
> >> >
> >> > Is there a recommended notation to avoid it?
> >> >
> >> > Maybe, simply omit the "@" ?
> >>
> >> I think just s/@/-/ should be fine, e.g. call the above opp-1000000000.
> >
> > That's fine with me. I can send a patch to fix all existing users if we all
> > agree for it.
> >
> > --
> > viresh
>
>
> Any progress on this?
>
> Did we reach on agreement with s/@/-/ ?
We can follow this as no one else objected. I will send a patch for existing
entries and you can do it for the newer ones.
--
viresh
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2017-04-10 4:58 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2017-02-26 5:18 Recommended notation for OPP to avoid DTC warnings Masahiro Yamada
2017-02-26 5:18 ` Masahiro Yamada
2017-02-26 5:18 ` Masahiro Yamada
2017-02-27 3:42 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-02-27 3:42 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-02-27 3:42 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-02-27 10:44 ` Mark Rutland
2017-02-27 10:44 ` Mark Rutland
2017-02-27 10:44 ` Mark Rutland
2017-02-27 10:55 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-02-27 10:55 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-02-27 10:55 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-02-27 10:58 ` Masahiro Yamada
2017-02-27 10:58 ` Masahiro Yamada
2017-03-31 2:59 ` Masahiro Yamada
2017-03-31 2:59 ` Masahiro Yamada
2017-04-10 4:58 ` Viresh Kumar
2017-04-10 4:58 ` Viresh Kumar
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.