[U-Boot] [PATCH] mips: fix DTC unit warnings

[Tom Rini]

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 07:38:36AM +0200, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> Hello Stephen,
> 
> Am 15.04.2016 um 18:56 schrieb Stephen Warren:
> >On 04/15/2016 10:30 AM, Tom Rini wrote:
> >>On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 05:23:54PM +0200, Andreas Färber wrote:
> >>>Am 15.04.2016 um 12:59 schrieb Heiko Schocher:
> >>>>Fix following warnings for all mips based boards:
> >>>>      mips:  +   pic32mzdask
> >>>>+Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /memory has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
> >>>>+Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /cpus/cpu at 0 has a unit name, but no reg property
> >
> >Note that I am quite out-of-the-loop on these warning. I wrote the dtc patch that triggers them
> >years ago, but it's only recently been applied due to Rob's efforts. I'm at most tangentially aware
> >of the discussions surrounding applying it now.
> >
> >
> >>>>diff --git a/arch/mips/dts/pic32mzda.dtsi b/arch/mips/dts/pic32mzda.dtsi
> >
> >>>>      cpus {
> >>>>-        cpu at 0 {
> >>>>+        cpu {
> >>>>              compatible = "mips,mips14kc";
> >
> >Surely the correct fix is to add a reg property? (Of course, this depends on the binding definition;
> >for ARM my assertion would certainly be true). If not, what does MIPS do about SMP? Even if you
> >write, say, 4 nodes with name "cpu" they'll all become the same single node in the DTB.
> 
> Yes, everywhere I removed the @address I hope to get a response with
> the correct reg value. It is not possible for me to look through all
> the RMs ... nor test the new DTS on real boards ... and nobody has
> volunteered to fix the warnings, so I posted this "fixup" patch ...

Yes, we need to, but this isn't strictly a U-Boot problem, so this is by
and large the wrong place to start with these patches.

> So, lets discuss the correct fix ...
> 
> Hmm... is there a valid reg property for cpu ? Or can we add a dummy one?
> 
> Or may we do a "cpu at 0" -> "cpu0"?

No, in this case MIPS needs to update their skeleton to match the normal
CPU binding.

[snip]
> >Equally though, anyone working on DT in U-Boot should be hanging out on the device tree mailing
> >list, and getting actively involved in discussions, rather than hiding here.
> 
> Hmm... hidding is maybe the wrong definition ... instead I would call
> it "stack overflow" ... I try to follow device tree mailing list too,
> but also U-Boot, lkml, linux-mtd, ... and beside of this, I have also
> to work
> 
> so, yes I miss some(a lot currently) threads ... so, sorry for poping
> this thread up, but I want to get rid of this warnings ...

Well, sorry, but we're not going to address these warnings any time
soon, by and large.  The vast majority of these are in DT files that we
inherit, almost entirely, from the kernel.  The ones that we don't (ie
most of x86) we should only update to fix this warning once everyone
else agrees on the correct new style.  Or if they already have, we need
to do it that way.

You may wish to have travis-ci stuff pin down to an older DTC version
for a while, to cut down on noise.

-- 
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/20160418/7e219a42/attachment.sig>