linux-kernel - Recommended notation for OPP to avoid DTC warnings

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAK7LNAQyc9=3d07-1upywYDk-AaRUGK4mJwAVduCuEJgnY1uFA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sun, 26 Feb 2017 14:18:03 +0900
From:   Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
To:     Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc:     masahiroy@...nel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Recommended notation for OPP to avoid DTC warnings

Hi.


Decumentation/devicetree/bindings/opp/opp.txt
takes examples like this:

        opp@...0000000 {
                opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1000000000>;
                opp-microvolt = <970000 975000 985000>;
                opp-microamp = <70000>;
                clock-latency-ns = <300000>;
                opp-suspend;
        };
        opp@...0000000 {
                opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1100000000>;
                opp-microvolt = <980000 1000000 1010000>;
                opp-microamp = <80000>;
                clock-latency-ns = <310000>;
        };
        opp@...0000000 {
                opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1200000000>;
                opp-microvolt = <1025000>;
                clock-latency-ns = <290000>;
                turbo-mode;
        };


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@...0000000 has a
unit name, but no reg property


Is there a recommended notation to avoid it?

Maybe, simply omit the "@" ?



-- 
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada