[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAL_JsqJi0w_j2wcb8f60XKOL3MFxkHFZpoyFhT-CCno_chb9Rw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2016 10:31:34 -0500
From: Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>
Cc: Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
Kukjin Kim <kgene@...nel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/11] ARM: dts: exynos: Fix DTC unit name warnings in cros-adc-thermistors
On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 1:57 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski
<k.kozlowski@...sung.com> wrote:
> Fix following DTC warnings in cros-adc-thermistors:
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /adc@...10000/ncp15wb473@3 has a unit name, but no reg property
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /adc@...10000/ncp15wb473@4 has a unit name, but no reg property
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /adc@...10000/ncp15wb473@5 has a unit name, but no reg property
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /adc@...10000/ncp15wb473@6 has a unit name, but no reg property
>
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>
> ---
> arch/arm/boot/dts/cros-adc-thermistors.dtsi | 8 ++++----
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/cros-adc-thermistors.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/cros-adc-thermistors.dtsi
> index acd4fe1833f2..87e676917603 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/cros-adc-thermistors.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/cros-adc-thermistors.dtsi
> @@ -13,28 +13,28 @@
> */
>
> &adc {
> - ncp15wb473@3 {
> + ncp15wb473_3 {
Don't use underscores.
> compatible = "murata,ncp15wb473";
> pullup-uv = <1800000>;
> pullup-ohm = <47000>;
> pulldown-ohm = <0>;
> io-channels = <&adc 3>;
I've not looked at the full binding here, but this case may warrant
adding a reg property as an ADC channel number is what i'd consider an
addressable thing. This is also kind of strange having a phandle to
the parent node.
Rob
Powered by blists - more mailing lists