On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 02:38:26PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 13:31:13 +0100, > Tom Rini wrote: > > > > On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 10:01:34AM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: > > > On Wed, 27 Oct 2021 17:54:52 +0100, > > > Michael Walle wrote: > > > > > > > > Please stop throwing every ad-hoc information in the device tree. Use the > > > > official bindings (or maybe some bindings which will get approved soon). > > > > > > > > On the quest of syncing the device tree used in u-boot with the one used in > > > > linux, there is this nice piece: > > > > > > > > gic_lpi_base: syscon@0x80000000 { > > > > compatible = "gic-lpi-base"; > > > > reg = <0x0 0x80000000 0x0 0x100000>; > > > > max-gic-redistributors = <2>; > > > > }; > > > > > > > > There is no offical binding for it. Also, the chances that there will be > > > > one are virtually zero. We need to get rid of it. In fact, most information > > > > there are already known or can be deduced via the offical binding. > > > > > > It is not "virtually zero". It is *exactly* zero. This node only shows > > > that the author didn't understand the nature of the problem, nor were > > > they aware of the existing solution which has been around since July > > > 2018. This solution doesn't require any update to the binding, only to > > > reserve the memory. > > > > > > I really wish people would stop piling crap in u-boot, and that the > > > u-boot maintainers would reach out to people familiar with the > > > architecture before merging this sort of changes. > > > > I'd be happy to reach out to people if I knew who would be receptive to > > spending some of their already I assume overload spare time looking in > > to things. If you're volunteering for "GIC related things" I'd be happy > > to CC you when patches come up. Thanks! > > Absolutely. It is far less painful for me to quickly eyeball a change > and ask pointed questions on the spot, rather than having to reverse > engineer a set of dubious changes months after they have been merged. > > I already provide similar "services" for EDK2, for example, so getting > the odd u-boot patch in my k.org inbox isn't a big deal. Will do, thanks! -- Tom