linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 06/11] ARM: dts: exynos: Fix DTC unit name warnings in Exynos5250

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <56FEAE29.6010405@osg.samsung.com>
Date:	Fri, 1 Apr 2016 13:21:45 -0400
From:	Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@....samsung.com>
To:	Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	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,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/11] ARM: dts: exynos: Fix DTC unit name warnings in
 Exynos5250

Hello Krzysztof,

Patch looks good to me, I have just one question below:

On 04/01/2016 02:57 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> Fix following DTC warnings in all Exynos5250 boards:
> 
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /dp-controller@...B0000/display-timings/timing@0 has a unit name, but no reg property
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /usb@...00000 has a unit name, but no reg property
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /usb@...00000/dwc3 has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /hdmi has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /mixer has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /video-phy@...40720 has a unit name, but no reg property
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /fixed-regulator@0 has a unit name, but no reg property
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /fixed-regulator@1 has a unit name, but no reg property
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /fixed-regulator@2 has a unit name, but no reg property
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /i2c@...70000/trackpad has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /i2c@...D0000/lvds-bridge@...ports/port@0 has a unit name, but no reg property
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /i2c@...D0000/lvds-bridge@...ports/port@1 has a unit name, but no reg property
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /i2c-arbitrator/i2c@...mbedded-controller has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /i2c-arbitrator/i2c@...ower-regulator has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
> Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /i2c@...A0000/embedded-controller has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name
> 
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>
> ---

[snip]

>  
> -	usb@...00000 {
> +	usb_dwc3 {
>  		compatible = "samsung,exynos5250-dwusb3";
>  		clocks = <&clock CLK_USB3>;
>  		clock-names = "usbdrd30";

The ePAPR document says that "The name of a node should be somewhat generic,
reflecting the function of the device and not its precise programming model"

So I wonder if this shouldn't be instead:

usb_dwc3: usb {

Although it seems that not all DT bindings follow this convention so probably
the name in your patch is correct.

Reviewed-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@....samsung.com>

Best regards,
-- 
Javier Martinez Canillas
Open Source Group
Samsung Research America