[U-Boot] [PATCH] arm: dts: socfpga: fix DTC unit name warnings

[U-Boot] [PATCH] arm: dts: socfpga: fix DTC unit name warnings

[Heiko Schocher]

Fix following DTC warnings for all socfpga boards:
Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /memory has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll/mpuclk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll/mainclk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll/dbg_base_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll/main_qspi_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll/main_nand_sdmmc_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll/cfg_h2f_usr0_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll/emac0_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll/emac1_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll/per_qsi_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll/per_nand_mmc_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll/per_base_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll/h2f_usr1_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/sdram_pll has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/sdram_pll/ddr_dqs_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/sdram_pll/ddr_2x_dqs_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/sdram_pll/ddr_dq_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/sdram_pll/h2f_usr2_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/usbphy at 0 has a unit name, but no reg property

Signed-off-by: Heiko Schocher <hs@denx.de>
---
This warnings pop up with the DTC compiler:
$ /tmp/dtc/dtc -v
Version: DTC 1.4.1-gbeef80b8

This fixes the compile warnings for:
https://travis-ci.org/u-boot/u-boot/jobs/122880430

see:
https://travis-ci.org/hsdenx/u-boot/jobs/123238779

 arch/arm/dts/skeleton.dtsi                     |  2 +-
 arch/arm/dts/socfpga.dtsi                      | 40 +++++++++++++-------------
 arch/arm/dts/socfpga_arria5_socdk.dts          |  2 +-
 arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_de0_nano_soc.dts |  2 +-
 arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_mcvevk.dts       |  2 +-
 arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_socdk.dts        |  2 +-
 arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_sockit.dts       |  2 +-
 arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_socrates.dts     |  2 +-
 8 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/skeleton.dtsi b/arch/arm/dts/skeleton.dtsi
index b41d241..a20da0a 100644
--- a/arch/arm/dts/skeleton.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm/dts/skeleton.dtsi
@@ -9,5 +9,5 @@
 	#size-cells = <1>;
 	chosen { };
 	aliases { };
-	memory { device_type = "memory"; reg = <0 0>; };
+	memory at 0 { device_type = "memory"; reg = <0 0>; };
 };
diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/socfpga.dtsi b/arch/arm/dts/socfpga.dtsi
index 8588221..b4196ef 100644
--- a/arch/arm/dts/socfpga.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm/dts/socfpga.dtsi
@@ -128,7 +128,7 @@
 						compatible = "fixed-clock";
 					};
 
-					main_pll: main_pll {
+					main_pll: main_pll at 40 {
 						#address-cells = <1>;
 						#size-cells = <0>;
 						#clock-cells = <0>;
@@ -136,7 +136,7 @@
 						clocks = <&osc1>;
 						reg = <0x40>;
 
-						mpuclk: mpuclk {
+						mpuclk: mpuclk at 48 {
 							#clock-cells = <0>;
 							compatible = "altr,socfpga-perip-clk";
 							clocks = <&main_pll>;
@@ -144,7 +144,7 @@
 							reg = <0x48>;
 						};
 
-						mainclk: mainclk {
+						mainclk: mainclk at 4c {
 							#clock-cells = <0>;
 							compatible = "altr,socfpga-perip-clk";
 							clocks = <&main_pll>;
@@ -152,7 +152,7 @@
 							reg = <0x4C>;
 						};
 
-						dbg_base_clk: dbg_base_clk {
+						dbg_base_clk: dbg_base_clk at 50 {
 							#clock-cells = <0>;
 							compatible = "altr,socfpga-perip-clk";
 							clocks = <&main_pll>;
@@ -160,21 +160,21 @@
 							reg = <0x50>;
 						};
 
-						main_qspi_clk: main_qspi_clk {
+						main_qspi_clk: main_qspi_clk at 54 {
 							#clock-cells = <0>;
 							compatible = "altr,socfpga-perip-clk";
 							clocks = <&main_pll>;
 							reg = <0x54>;
 						};
 
-						main_nand_sdmmc_clk: main_nand_sdmmc_clk {
+						main_nand_sdmmc_clk: main_nand_sdmmc_clk at 58 {
 							#clock-cells = <0>;
 							compatible = "altr,socfpga-perip-clk";
 							clocks = <&main_pll>;
 							reg = <0x58>;
 						};
 
-						cfg_h2f_usr0_clk: cfg_h2f_usr0_clk {
+						cfg_h2f_usr0_clk: cfg_h2f_usr0_clk at 5c {
 							#clock-cells = <0>;
 							compatible = "altr,socfpga-perip-clk";
 							clocks = <&main_pll>;
@@ -182,7 +182,7 @@
 						};
 					};
 
-					periph_pll: periph_pll {
+					periph_pll: periph_pll at 80 {
 						#address-cells = <1>;
 						#size-cells = <0>;
 						#clock-cells = <0>;
@@ -190,42 +190,42 @@
 						clocks = <&osc1>, <&osc2>, <&f2s_periph_ref_clk>;
 						reg = <0x80>;
 
-						emac0_clk: emac0_clk {
+						emac0_clk: emac0_clk at 88 {
 							#clock-cells = <0>;
 							compatible = "altr,socfpga-perip-clk";
 							clocks = <&periph_pll>;
 							reg = <0x88>;
 						};
 
-						emac1_clk: emac1_clk {
+						emac1_clk: emac1_clk at 8c {
 							#clock-cells = <0>;
 							compatible = "altr,socfpga-perip-clk";
 							clocks = <&periph_pll>;
 							reg = <0x8C>;
 						};
 
-						per_qspi_clk: per_qsi_clk {
+						per_qspi_clk: per_qsi_clk at 90 {
 							#clock-cells = <0>;
 							compatible = "altr,socfpga-perip-clk";
 							clocks = <&periph_pll>;
 							reg = <0x90>;
 						};
 
-						per_nand_mmc_clk: per_nand_mmc_clk {
+						per_nand_mmc_clk: per_nand_mmc_clk at 94 {
 							#clock-cells = <0>;
 							compatible = "altr,socfpga-perip-clk";
 							clocks = <&periph_pll>;
 							reg = <0x94>;
 						};
 
-						per_base_clk: per_base_clk {
+						per_base_clk: per_base_clk at 98 {
 							#clock-cells = <0>;
 							compatible = "altr,socfpga-perip-clk";
 							clocks = <&periph_pll>;
 							reg = <0x98>;
 						};
 
-						h2f_usr1_clk: h2f_usr1_clk {
+						h2f_usr1_clk: h2f_usr1_clk at 9c {
 							#clock-cells = <0>;
 							compatible = "altr,socfpga-perip-clk";
 							clocks = <&periph_pll>;
@@ -233,7 +233,7 @@
 						};
 					};
 
-					sdram_pll: sdram_pll {
+					sdram_pll: sdram_pll at c0 {
 						#address-cells = <1>;
 						#size-cells = <0>;
 						#clock-cells = <0>;
@@ -241,28 +241,28 @@
 						clocks = <&osc1>, <&osc2>, <&f2s_sdram_ref_clk>;
 						reg = <0xC0>;
 
-						ddr_dqs_clk: ddr_dqs_clk {
+						ddr_dqs_clk: ddr_dqs_clk at c8 {
 							#clock-cells = <0>;
 							compatible = "altr,socfpga-perip-clk";
 							clocks = <&sdram_pll>;
 							reg = <0xC8>;
 						};
 
-						ddr_2x_dqs_clk: ddr_2x_dqs_clk {
+						ddr_2x_dqs_clk: ddr_2x_dqs_clk at cc {
 							#clock-cells = <0>;
 							compatible = "altr,socfpga-perip-clk";
 							clocks = <&sdram_pll>;
 							reg = <0xCC>;
 						};
 
-						ddr_dq_clk: ddr_dq_clk {
+						ddr_dq_clk: ddr_dq_clk at d0 {
 							#clock-cells = <0>;
 							compatible = "altr,socfpga-perip-clk";
 							clocks = <&sdram_pll>;
 							reg = <0xD0>;
 						};
 
-						h2f_usr2_clk: h2f_usr2_clk {
+						h2f_usr2_clk: h2f_usr2_clk at d4 {
 							#clock-cells = <0>;
 							compatible = "altr,socfpga-perip-clk";
 							clocks = <&sdram_pll>;
@@ -742,7 +742,7 @@
 			reg = <0xffd05000 0x1000>;
 		};
 
-		usbphy0: usbphy at 0 {
+		usbphy0: usbphy {
 			#phy-cells = <0>;
 			compatible = "usb-nop-xceiv";
 			status = "okay";
diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/socfpga_arria5_socdk.dts b/arch/arm/dts/socfpga_arria5_socdk.dts
index 9ac48a1..489b778 100644
--- a/arch/arm/dts/socfpga_arria5_socdk.dts
+++ b/arch/arm/dts/socfpga_arria5_socdk.dts
@@ -14,7 +14,7 @@
 		bootargs = "console=ttyS0,115200";
 	};
 
-	memory {
+	memory at 0 {
 		name = "memory";
 		device_type = "memory";
 		reg = <0x0 0x40000000>; /* 1GB */
diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_de0_nano_soc.dts b/arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_de0_nano_soc.dts
index dc09bed..b8e4b1b 100644
--- a/arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_de0_nano_soc.dts
+++ b/arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_de0_nano_soc.dts
@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@
 		udc0 = &usb1;
 	};
 
-	memory {
+	memory at 0 {
 		name = "memory";
 		device_type = "memory";
 		reg = <0x0 0x40000000>; /* 1GB */
diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_mcvevk.dts b/arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_mcvevk.dts
index 7d3f989..af87a73 100644
--- a/arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_mcvevk.dts
+++ b/arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_mcvevk.dts
@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@
 		udc0 = &usb1;
 	};
 
-	memory {
+	memory at 0 {
 		name = "memory";
 		device_type = "memory";
 		reg = <0x0 0x40000000>; /* 1GB */
diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_socdk.dts b/arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_socdk.dts
index da13435..fa0acc4 100644
--- a/arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_socdk.dts
+++ b/arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_socdk.dts
@@ -14,7 +14,7 @@
 		bootargs = "console=ttyS0,115200";
 	};
 
-	memory {
+	memory at 0 {
 		name = "memory";
 		device_type = "memory";
 		reg = <0x0 0x40000000>; /* 1GB */
diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_sockit.dts b/arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_sockit.dts
index e45c2ab..d24412e 100644
--- a/arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_sockit.dts
+++ b/arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_sockit.dts
@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@
 		udc0 = &usb1;
 	};
 
-	memory {
+	memory at 0 {
 		name = "memory";
 		device_type = "memory";
 		reg = <0x0 0x40000000>; /* 1GB */
diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_socrates.dts b/arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_socrates.dts
index 591d96c..b25e6af 100644
--- a/arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_socrates.dts
+++ b/arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_socrates.dts
@@ -18,7 +18,7 @@
 		udc0 = &usb1;
 	};
 
-	memory {
+	memory at 0 {
 		name = "memory";
 		device_type = "memory";
 		reg = <0x0 0x40000000>; /* 1GB */
-- 
2.5.0

[U-Boot] [PATCH] arm: dts: socfpga: fix DTC unit name warnings

[Marek Vasut]

On 04/15/2016 12:41 PM, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> Fix following DTC warnings for all socfpga boards:
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /memory has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll/mpuclk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll/mainclk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll/dbg_base_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll/main_qspi_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll/main_nand_sdmmc_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll/cfg_h2f_usr0_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll/emac0_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll/emac1_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll/per_qsi_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll/per_nand_mmc_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll/per_base_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll/h2f_usr1_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/sdram_pll has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/sdram_pll/ddr_dqs_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/sdram_pll/ddr_2x_dqs_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/sdram_pll/ddr_dq_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/sdram_pll/h2f_usr2_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/usbphy at 0 has a unit name, but no reg property

How come Linux isn't affected by this ?

> Signed-off-by: Heiko Schocher <hs@denx.de>
> ---
> This warnings pop up with the DTC compiler:
> $ /tmp/dtc/dtc -v
> Version: DTC 1.4.1-gbeef80b8
> 
> This fixes the compile warnings for:
> https://travis-ci.org/u-boot/u-boot/jobs/122880430
> 
> see:
> https://travis-ci.org/hsdenx/u-boot/jobs/123238779
> 
>  arch/arm/dts/skeleton.dtsi                     |  2 +-
>  arch/arm/dts/socfpga.dtsi                      | 40 +++++++++++++-------------
>  arch/arm/dts/socfpga_arria5_socdk.dts          |  2 +-
>  arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_de0_nano_soc.dts |  2 +-
>  arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_mcvevk.dts       |  2 +-
>  arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_socdk.dts        |  2 +-
>  arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_sockit.dts       |  2 +-
>  arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_socrates.dts     |  2 +-
>  8 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/skeleton.dtsi b/arch/arm/dts/skeleton.dtsi
> index b41d241..a20da0a 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/dts/skeleton.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm/dts/skeleton.dtsi
> @@ -9,5 +9,5 @@
>  	#size-cells = <1>;
>  	chosen { };
>  	aliases { };
> -	memory { device_type = "memory"; reg = <0 0>; };
> +	memory at 0 { device_type = "memory"; reg = <0 0>; };
>  };

Can you split this into skeleton.dtsi patch and socfpga-only patch?
That'd help containing the changes.

Thanks!

Best regards,
Marek Vasut

[U-Boot] [PATCH] arm: dts: socfpga: fix DTC unit name warnings

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

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

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

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

> @@ -742,7 +742,7 @@
>  			reg = <0xffd05000 0x1000>;
>  		};
>  
> -		usbphy0: usbphy at 0 {
> +		usbphy0: usbphy {
>  			#phy-cells = <0>;
>  			compatible = "usb-nop-xceiv";
>  			status = "okay";

And this sounds like a bug waiting to happen..

Best regards,
									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

[U-Boot] [PATCH] arm: dts: socfpga: fix DTC unit name warnings

[Heiko Schocher]

Hello Marek,

Am 15.04.2016 um 16:18 schrieb Marek Vasut:
> On 04/15/2016 12:41 PM, Heiko Schocher wrote:
>> Fix following DTC warnings for all socfpga boards:
>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /memory has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll/mpuclk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll/mainclk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll/dbg_base_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll/main_qspi_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll/main_nand_sdmmc_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll/cfg_h2f_usr0_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll/emac0_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll/emac1_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll/per_qsi_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll/per_nand_mmc_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll/per_base_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll/h2f_usr1_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/sdram_pll has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/sdram_pll/ddr_dqs_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/sdram_pll/ddr_2x_dqs_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/sdram_pll/ddr_dq_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/sdram_pll/h2f_usr2_clk has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/usbphy at 0 has a unit name, but no reg property
>
> How come Linux isn't affected by this ?

I think linux is also affected!

>> Signed-off-by: Heiko Schocher <hs@denx.de>
>> ---
>> This warnings pop up with the DTC compiler:
>> $ /tmp/dtc/dtc -v
>> Version: DTC 1.4.1-gbeef80b8
>>
>> This fixes the compile warnings for:
>> https://travis-ci.org/u-boot/u-boot/jobs/122880430
>>
>> see:
>> https://travis-ci.org/hsdenx/u-boot/jobs/123238779
>>
>>   arch/arm/dts/skeleton.dtsi                     |  2 +-
>>   arch/arm/dts/socfpga.dtsi                      | 40 +++++++++++++-------------
>>   arch/arm/dts/socfpga_arria5_socdk.dts          |  2 +-
>>   arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_de0_nano_soc.dts |  2 +-
>>   arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_mcvevk.dts       |  2 +-
>>   arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_socdk.dts        |  2 +-
>>   arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_sockit.dts       |  2 +-
>>   arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_socrates.dts     |  2 +-
>>   8 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/skeleton.dtsi b/arch/arm/dts/skeleton.dtsi
>> index b41d241..a20da0a 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/dts/skeleton.dtsi
>> +++ b/arch/arm/dts/skeleton.dtsi
>> @@ -9,5 +9,5 @@
>>   	#size-cells = <1>;
>>   	chosen { };
>>   	aliases { };
>> -	memory { device_type = "memory"; reg = <0 0>; };
>> +	memory at 0 { device_type = "memory"; reg = <0 0>; };
>>   };
>
> Can you split this into skeleton.dtsi patch and socfpga-only patch?
> That'd help containing the changes.

Yes, of course!

bye,
Heiko
-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,      Managing Director: Wolfgang Denk
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany

[U-Boot] [PATCH] arm: dts: socfpga: fix DTC unit name warnings

[Heiko Schocher]

Hello Pavel,

Am 17.04.2016 um 23:55 schrieb Pavel Machek:
> Hi!
>
>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/usbphy at 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 <swarren@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 at 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 at 40 {
>>   						#address-cells = <1>;
>>   						#size-cells = <0>;
>>   						#clock-cells = <0>;
>> @@ -136,7 +136,7 @@
>>   						clocks = <&osc1>;
>>   						reg = <0x40>;
>>
>> -						mpuclk: mpuclk {
>> +						mpuclk: mpuclk at 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 at 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] [PATCH] arm: dts: socfpga: fix DTC unit name warnings

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> >Hi!
> >
> >>Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/usbphy at 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:

IMO compiler should be fixed.

>     ePAPR 1.1 section 2.2.1.1 "Node Name Requirements" specifies
> that any

This is arm. This is not powerpc. It is 2016, not 1997.

> >>-		usbphy0: usbphy at 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?

Introduce fake "reg" property to shut up warning?

I guess this should be solved on the kernel list, and I believe the
warnings are wrong.

Best regards,

									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

[U-Boot] [PATCH] arm: dts: socfpga: fix DTC unit name warnings

[Marek Vasut]

On 04/18/2016 12:00 PM, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/usbphy at 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:
> 
> IMO compiler should be fixed.

The commit is pretty clear on why the compiler is right.
Do you have a counter-argument ?

>>     ePAPR 1.1 section 2.2.1.1 "Node Name Requirements" specifies
>> that any
> 
> This is arm. This is not powerpc. It is 2016, not 1997.

Old does not imply incorrect.

>>>> -		usbphy0: usbphy at 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?
> 
> Introduce fake "reg" property to shut up warning?
> 
> I guess this should be solved on the kernel list

Bringing it up on the DT discuss is a good idea.

> and I believe the
> warnings are wrong.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> 									Pavel
> 


-- 
Best regards,
Marek Vasut

[U-Boot] [PATCH] arm: dts: socfpga: fix DTC unit name warnings

[Marek Vasut]

On 04/18/2016 06:55 AM, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> Hello Marek,
> 
> Am 15.04.2016 um 16:18 schrieb Marek Vasut:
>> On 04/15/2016 12:41 PM, Heiko Schocher wrote:
>>> Fix following DTC warnings for all socfpga boards:
>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /memory has a reg or ranges
>>> property, but no unit name
>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll has a reg or ranges property,
>>> but no unit name
>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll/mpuclk has a reg or ranges
>>> property, but no unit name
>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll/mainclk has a reg or ranges
>>> property, but no unit name
>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll/dbg_base_clk has a reg or ranges
>>> property, but no unit name
>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll/main_qspi_clk has a reg or
>>> ranges property, but no unit name
>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll/main_nand_sdmmc_clk has a reg or
>>> ranges property, but no unit name
>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll/cfg_h2f_usr0_clk has a reg or
>>> ranges property, but no unit name
>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll has a reg or ranges property,
>>> but no unit name
>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll/emac0_clk has a reg or ranges
>>> property, but no unit name
>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll/emac1_clk has a reg or ranges
>>> property, but no unit name
>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll/per_qsi_clk has a reg or
>>> ranges property, but no unit name
>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll/per_nand_mmc_clk has a reg or
>>> ranges property, but no unit name
>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll/per_base_clk has a reg or
>>> ranges property, but no unit name
>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll/h2f_usr1_clk has a reg or
>>> ranges property, but no unit name
>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/sdram_pll has a reg or ranges property,
>>> but no unit name
>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/sdram_pll/ddr_dqs_clk has a reg or ranges
>>> property, but no unit name
>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/sdram_pll/ddr_2x_dqs_clk has a reg or
>>> ranges property, but no unit name
>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/sdram_pll/ddr_dq_clk has a reg or ranges
>>> property, but no unit name
>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/sdram_pll/h2f_usr2_clk has a reg or
>>> ranges property, but no unit name
>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/usbphy at 0 has a unit name,
>>> but no reg property
>>
>> How come Linux isn't affected by this ?
> 
> I think linux is also affected!

You might want to bring it up on the LKML, like Pavel suggested.

>>> Signed-off-by: Heiko Schocher <hs@denx.de>
>>> ---
>>> This warnings pop up with the DTC compiler:
>>> $ /tmp/dtc/dtc -v
>>> Version: DTC 1.4.1-gbeef80b8
>>>
>>> This fixes the compile warnings for:
>>> https://travis-ci.org/u-boot/u-boot/jobs/122880430
>>>
>>> see:
>>> https://travis-ci.org/hsdenx/u-boot/jobs/123238779
>>>
>>>   arch/arm/dts/skeleton.dtsi                     |  2 +-
>>>   arch/arm/dts/socfpga.dtsi                      | 40
>>> +++++++++++++-------------
>>>   arch/arm/dts/socfpga_arria5_socdk.dts          |  2 +-
>>>   arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_de0_nano_soc.dts |  2 +-
>>>   arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_mcvevk.dts       |  2 +-
>>>   arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_socdk.dts        |  2 +-
>>>   arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_sockit.dts       |  2 +-
>>>   arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_socrates.dts     |  2 +-
>>>   8 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/skeleton.dtsi b/arch/arm/dts/skeleton.dtsi
>>> index b41d241..a20da0a 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm/dts/skeleton.dtsi
>>> +++ b/arch/arm/dts/skeleton.dtsi
>>> @@ -9,5 +9,5 @@
>>>       #size-cells = <1>;
>>>       chosen { };
>>>       aliases { };
>>> -    memory { device_type = "memory"; reg = <0 0>; };
>>> +    memory at 0 { device_type = "memory"; reg = <0 0>; };
>>>   };
>>
>> Can you split this into skeleton.dtsi patch and socfpga-only patch?
>> That'd help containing the changes.
> 
> Yes, of course!

Please hold the patch for a bit, see above.

-- 
Best regards,
Marek Vasut

[U-Boot] [PATCH] arm: dts: socfpga: fix DTC unit name warnings

[Heiko Schocher]

Hello Pavel,

Am 18.04.2016 um 12:00 schrieb Pavel Machek:
> Hi!
>
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/usbphy at 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:
>
> IMO compiler should be fixed.

A simple revert of this commit fixes it ... yes, but, see below.

>>      ePAPR 1.1 section 2.2.1.1 "Node Name Requirements" specifies
>> that any
>
> This is arm. This is not powerpc. It is 2016, not 1997.

Hmm...

>>>> -		usbphy0: usbphy at 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?
>
> Introduce fake "reg" property to shut up warning?

or fix "usbphy at 0" to "usbphy0".

> I guess this should be solved on the kernel list, and I believe the
> warnings are wrong.

I think it is discussed on the kernel mailinglist, see for example:

http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.devicetree.compiler/432

Nice here the comment from rob:
"Any objections to this series will result in getting added as a DT
binding maintainer. :)"

So, feel free to speak up!

bye,
Heiko
-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,      Managing Director: Wolfgang Denk
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany

[U-Boot] [PATCH] arm: dts: socfpga: fix DTC unit name warnings

[Heiko Schocher]

Hello Marek,

Am 18.04.2016 um 12:36 schrieb Marek Vasut:
> On 04/18/2016 06:55 AM, Heiko Schocher wrote:
>> Hello Marek,
>>
>> Am 15.04.2016 um 16:18 schrieb Marek Vasut:
>>> On 04/15/2016 12:41 PM, Heiko Schocher wrote:
>>>> Fix following DTC warnings for all socfpga boards:
>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /memory has a reg or ranges
>>>> property, but no unit name
>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll has a reg or ranges property,
>>>> but no unit name
>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll/mpuclk has a reg or ranges
>>>> property, but no unit name
>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll/mainclk has a reg or ranges
>>>> property, but no unit name
>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll/dbg_base_clk has a reg or ranges
>>>> property, but no unit name
>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll/main_qspi_clk has a reg or
>>>> ranges property, but no unit name
>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll/main_nand_sdmmc_clk has a reg or
>>>> ranges property, but no unit name
>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll/cfg_h2f_usr0_clk has a reg or
>>>> ranges property, but no unit name
>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll has a reg or ranges property,
>>>> but no unit name
>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll/emac0_clk has a reg or ranges
>>>> property, but no unit name
>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll/emac1_clk has a reg or ranges
>>>> property, but no unit name
>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll/per_qsi_clk has a reg or
>>>> ranges property, but no unit name
>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll/per_nand_mmc_clk has a reg or
>>>> ranges property, but no unit name
>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll/per_base_clk has a reg or
>>>> ranges property, but no unit name
>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll/h2f_usr1_clk has a reg or
>>>> ranges property, but no unit name
>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/sdram_pll has a reg or ranges property,
>>>> but no unit name
>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/sdram_pll/ddr_dqs_clk has a reg or ranges
>>>> property, but no unit name
>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/sdram_pll/ddr_2x_dqs_clk has a reg or
>>>> ranges property, but no unit name
>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/sdram_pll/ddr_dq_clk has a reg or ranges
>>>> property, but no unit name
>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/sdram_pll/h2f_usr2_clk has a reg or
>>>> ranges property, but no unit name
>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/usbphy at 0 has a unit name,
>>>> but no reg property
>>>
>>> How come Linux isn't affected by this ?
>>
>> I think linux is also affected!
>
> You might want to bring it up on the LKML, like Pavel suggested.

Do we have the same DTS as linux?
(If so, isn;t it a bad idea to hold the files on 2 places?)

bye,
Heiko
>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Heiko Schocher <hs@denx.de>
>>>> ---
>>>> This warnings pop up with the DTC compiler:
>>>> $ /tmp/dtc/dtc -v
>>>> Version: DTC 1.4.1-gbeef80b8
>>>>
>>>> This fixes the compile warnings for:
>>>> https://travis-ci.org/u-boot/u-boot/jobs/122880430
>>>>
>>>> see:
>>>> https://travis-ci.org/hsdenx/u-boot/jobs/123238779
>>>>
>>>>    arch/arm/dts/skeleton.dtsi                     |  2 +-
>>>>    arch/arm/dts/socfpga.dtsi                      | 40
>>>> +++++++++++++-------------
>>>>    arch/arm/dts/socfpga_arria5_socdk.dts          |  2 +-
>>>>    arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_de0_nano_soc.dts |  2 +-
>>>>    arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_mcvevk.dts       |  2 +-
>>>>    arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_socdk.dts        |  2 +-
>>>>    arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_sockit.dts       |  2 +-
>>>>    arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_socrates.dts     |  2 +-
>>>>    8 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/skeleton.dtsi b/arch/arm/dts/skeleton.dtsi
>>>> index b41d241..a20da0a 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/arm/dts/skeleton.dtsi
>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/dts/skeleton.dtsi
>>>> @@ -9,5 +9,5 @@
>>>>        #size-cells = <1>;
>>>>        chosen { };
>>>>        aliases { };
>>>> -    memory { device_type = "memory"; reg = <0 0>; };
>>>> +    memory at 0 { device_type = "memory"; reg = <0 0>; };
>>>>    };
>>>
>>> Can you split this into skeleton.dtsi patch and socfpga-only patch?
>>> That'd help containing the changes.
>>
>> Yes, of course!
>
> Please hold the patch for a bit, see above.
>

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,      Managing Director: Wolfgang Denk
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany

[U-Boot] [PATCH] arm: dts: socfpga: fix DTC unit name warnings

[Marek Vasut]

On 04/18/2016 01:20 PM, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> Hello Marek,
> 
> Am 18.04.2016 um 12:36 schrieb Marek Vasut:
>> On 04/18/2016 06:55 AM, Heiko Schocher wrote:
>>> Hello Marek,
>>>
>>> Am 15.04.2016 um 16:18 schrieb Marek Vasut:
>>>> On 04/15/2016 12:41 PM, Heiko Schocher wrote:
>>>>> Fix following DTC warnings for all socfpga boards:
>>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /memory has a reg or ranges
>>>>> property, but no unit name
>>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll has a reg or ranges property,
>>>>> but no unit name
>>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll/mpuclk has a reg or ranges
>>>>> property, but no unit name
>>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll/mainclk has a reg or ranges
>>>>> property, but no unit name
>>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll/dbg_base_clk has a reg or ranges
>>>>> property, but no unit name
>>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll/main_qspi_clk has a reg or
>>>>> ranges property, but no unit name
>>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll/main_nand_sdmmc_clk has a reg or
>>>>> ranges property, but no unit name
>>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/main_pll/cfg_h2f_usr0_clk has a reg or
>>>>> ranges property, but no unit name
>>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll has a reg or ranges property,
>>>>> but no unit name
>>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll/emac0_clk has a reg or ranges
>>>>> property, but no unit name
>>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll/emac1_clk has a reg or ranges
>>>>> property, but no unit name
>>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll/per_qsi_clk has a reg or
>>>>> ranges property, but no unit name
>>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll/per_nand_mmc_clk has a reg or
>>>>> ranges property, but no unit name
>>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll/per_base_clk has a reg or
>>>>> ranges property, but no unit name
>>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/periph_pll/h2f_usr1_clk has a reg or
>>>>> ranges property, but no unit name
>>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/sdram_pll has a reg or ranges property,
>>>>> but no unit name
>>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/sdram_pll/ddr_dqs_clk has a reg or ranges
>>>>> property, but no unit name
>>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/sdram_pll/ddr_2x_dqs_clk has a reg or
>>>>> ranges property, but no unit name
>>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/sdram_pll/ddr_dq_clk has a reg or ranges
>>>>> property, but no unit name
>>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node
>>>>> /soc/clkmgr at ffd04000/clocks/sdram_pll/h2f_usr2_clk has a reg or
>>>>> ranges property, but no unit name
>>>>> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /soc/usbphy at 0 has a unit name,
>>>>> but no reg property
>>>>
>>>> How come Linux isn't affected by this ?
>>>
>>> I think linux is also affected!
>>
>> You might want to bring it up on the LKML, like Pavel suggested.
> 
> Do we have the same DTS as linux?
> (If so, isn;t it a bad idea to hold the files on 2 places?)

The DTS should be very similar I hope. U-Boot has QSPI nodes and the
u-boot,dm-pre-reloc properties.

-- 
Best regards,
Marek Vasut

[U-Boot] [PATCH] arm: dts: socfpga: fix DTC unit name warnings

[Tom Rini]

On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 12:41:02PM +0200, Heiko Schocher wrote:

> Fix following DTC warnings for all socfpga boards:

We're going to defer on this patch for now, thanks.

-- 
Tom
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20160418/c9d1e71a/attachment.sig>

[U-Boot] [PATCH] arm: dts: socfpga: fix DTC unit name warnings

[Marek Vasut]

On 04/18/2016 05:31 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 12:41:02PM +0200, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> 
>> Fix following DTC warnings for all socfpga boards:
> 
> We're going to defer on this patch for now, thanks.
> 
Can you elaborate please?

-- 
Best regards,
Marek Vasut

[U-Boot] [PATCH] arm: dts: socfpga: fix DTC unit name warnings

[Tom Rini]

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 05:37:02PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> On 04/18/2016 05:31 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 12:41:02PM +0200, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> > 
> >> Fix following DTC warnings for all socfpga boards:
> > 
> > We're going to defer on this patch for now, thanks.
> > 
> Can you elaborate please?

Yes, I did in another of the threads here (aside, I wish this was done a
series and there was a 0/N, but, oh well).  We import these from the
kernel, as this isn't a U-Boot change, we're the wrong place to start
making these changes by and large.  In some quick googling around, the
various SoC trees are updating to fix these problems and we'll pull them
in whenever our relevant custodian is happy.  Or when someone can say
"resync with $hash from the kernel" and get them Acked-by or whatever.

-- 
Tom
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20160418/b661effb/attachment.sig>

[U-Boot] [PATCH] arm: dts: socfpga: fix DTC unit name warnings

[Marek Vasut]

On 04/18/2016 05:46 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 05:37:02PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> On 04/18/2016 05:31 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
>>> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 12:41:02PM +0200, Heiko Schocher wrote:
>>>
>>>> Fix following DTC warnings for all socfpga boards:
>>>
>>> We're going to defer on this patch for now, thanks.
>>>
>> Can you elaborate please?
> 
> Yes, I did in another of the threads here (aside, I wish this was done a
> series and there was a 0/N, but, oh well).  We import these from the
> kernel, as this isn't a U-Boot change, we're the wrong place to start
> making these changes by and large.  In some quick googling around, the
> various SoC trees are updating to fix these problems and we'll pull them
> in whenever our relevant custodian is happy.  Or when someone can say
> "resync with $hash from the kernel" and get them Acked-by or whatever.
> 
You will want to backport this patch, it's in linux-next too:

http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-kbuild/msg12538.html

-- 
Best regards,
Marek Vasut

[U-Boot] [PATCH] arm: dts: socfpga: fix DTC unit name warnings

[Heiko Schocher]

Hello Tom,

Am 18.04.2016 um 17:46 schrieb Tom Rini:
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 05:37:02PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> On 04/18/2016 05:31 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
>>> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 12:41:02PM +0200, Heiko Schocher wrote:
>>>
>>>> Fix following DTC warnings for all socfpga boards:
>>>
>>> We're going to defer on this patch for now, thanks.
>>>
>> Can you elaborate please?
>
> Yes, I did in another of the threads here (aside, I wish this was done a
> series and there was a 0/N, but, oh well).  We import these from the

Sorry, my fault.

> kernel, as this isn't a U-Boot change, we're the wrong place to start
> making these changes by and large.  In some quick googling around, the
> various SoC trees are updating to fix these problems and we'll pull them
> in whenever our relevant custodian is happy.  Or when someone can say
> "resync with $hash from the kernel" and get them Acked-by or whatever.

Ok, so I stop with this patches.

bye,
Heiko
-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,      Managing Director: Wolfgang Denk
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany

[U-Boot] [PATCH] arm: dts: socfpga: fix DTC unit name warnings

[Heiko Schocher]

Hello Marek,

Am 18.04.2016 um 19:52 schrieb Marek Vasut:
> On 04/18/2016 05:46 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 05:37:02PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>> On 04/18/2016 05:31 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 12:41:02PM +0200, Heiko Schocher wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Fix following DTC warnings for all socfpga boards:
>>>>
>>>> We're going to defer on this patch for now, thanks.
>>>>
>>> Can you elaborate please?
>>
>> Yes, I did in another of the threads here (aside, I wish this was done a
>> series and there was a 0/N, but, oh well).  We import these from the
>> kernel, as this isn't a U-Boot change, we're the wrong place to start
>> making these changes by and large.  In some quick googling around, the
>> various SoC trees are updating to fix these problems and we'll pull them
>> in whenever our relevant custodian is happy.  Or when someone can say
>> "resync with $hash from the kernel" and get them Acked-by or whatever.
>>
> You will want to backport this patch, it's in linux-next too:
>
> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-kbuild/msg12538.html

Yes ... we ignore warnings ... maybe an agreement ...

I can prepare a patch for this, but I prefer to add this build flag
for each arch, so we can at least remove it for each arch, when all
warnings are fixed in linux and we did a sync with linux ...

Would this be OK?

bye,
Heiko
-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,      Managing Director: Wolfgang Denk
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany

[U-Boot] [PATCH] arm: dts: socfpga: fix DTC unit name warnings

[Marek Vasut]

On 04/19/2016 07:01 AM, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> Hello Marek,
> 
> Am 18.04.2016 um 19:52 schrieb Marek Vasut:
>> On 04/18/2016 05:46 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 05:37:02PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>>> On 04/18/2016 05:31 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 12:41:02PM +0200, Heiko Schocher wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Fix following DTC warnings for all socfpga boards:
>>>>>
>>>>> We're going to defer on this patch for now, thanks.
>>>>>
>>>> Can you elaborate please?
>>>
>>> Yes, I did in another of the threads here (aside, I wish this was done a
>>> series and there was a 0/N, but, oh well).  We import these from the
>>> kernel, as this isn't a U-Boot change, we're the wrong place to start
>>> making these changes by and large.  In some quick googling around, the
>>> various SoC trees are updating to fix these problems and we'll pull them
>>> in whenever our relevant custodian is happy.  Or when someone can say
>>> "resync with $hash from the kernel" and get them Acked-by or whatever.
>>>
>> You will want to backport this patch, it's in linux-next too:
>>
>> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-kbuild/msg12538.html
> 
> Yes ... we ignore warnings ... maybe an agreement ...
> 
> I can prepare a patch for this, but I prefer to add this build flag
> for each arch, so we can at least remove it for each arch, when all
> warnings are fixed in linux and we did a sync with linux ...
> 
> Would this be OK?

The patch explains that the warnings of this type are only displayed if
you set W=1 or W=2 for the build system. I suspect the DTC is just a bit
too eager to display warnings which are not very important.

If you want to hunt down warnings, set W=n , no need to introduce
another knob :)

-- 
Best regards,
Marek Vasut