Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1613589 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-03-31 05:10 +0200 |
| Last post | 2017-04-10 07:00 +0200 |
| Articles | 2 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: Recommended notation for OPP to avoid DTC warnings Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> - 2017-03-31 05:10 +0200
Re: Recommended notation for OPP to avoid DTC warnings Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> - 2017-04-10 07:00 +0200
| From | Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-31 05:10 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Recommended notation for OPP to avoid DTC warnings |
| Message-ID | <tqV6N-7m5-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
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
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-04-10 07:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tuzAJ-4sI-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1613589 |
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
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web