[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51960b81-d8df-423f-b24b-4b4ec1e7a245@codethink.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2025 19:25:59 +0100
From: Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@...ethink.co.uk>
To: Drew Fustini <fustini@...nel.org>
Cc: Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>, Paul Walmsley
<paul.walmsley@...ive.com>, Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Alexandre Ghiti <alex@...ti.fr>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley
<conor+dt@...nel.org>, Samuel Holland <samuel.holland@...ive.com>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Joel Stanley <jms@...storrent.com>,
Joel Stanley <joel@....id.au>, Michael Neuling <mikey@...ling.org>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>, Michael Ellerman <mpe@...nel.org>,
Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
Drew Fustini <dfustini@...storrent.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/7] riscv: dts: Add Tenstorrent Blackhole A0 SoC PCIe
cards
On 16/09/2025 18:27, Drew Fustini wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 02:56:05PM +0100, Ben Dooks wrote:
>> On 15/09/2025 18:52, Drew Fustini wrote:
>>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 05:47:08PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
>>>> On Sat, Sep 13, 2025 at 02:31:05PM -0700, Drew Fustini wrote:
>>>>> new file mode 100644
>>>>> index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..b2b08023643a2cebd4f924579024290bb355c9b3
>>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>>> +++ b/arch/riscv/boot/dts/tenstorrent/blackhole-a0-card.dts
>>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
>>>>> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR MIT)
>>>>> +/dts-v1/;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +#include "blackhole-a0.dtsi"
>>>>> +
>>>>> +/ {
>>>>> + model = "Tenstorrent Blackhole A0 SoC PCIe card";
>>>>> + compatible = "tenstorrent,blackhole-a0-card", "tenstorrent,blackhole-a0";
>>>>> +
>>>>> + memory@0 {
>>>>> + device_type = "memory";
>>>>> + reg = <0x4000 0x30000000 0x1 0x00000000>;
>>>>
>>>> This isn't at address zero as the node address claims.
>>>
>>> Thanks, I'll fix the unit address.
>>
>> Is it time to just assume any dtc can handle a 64bit number?
>
> Is it not valid for me to use the 64 bit hex number in the unit address?
>
>
No, the reg = < > contents. It is a right pain to read split 32bit
numbers and I thought dtc had been updated to allow 64bit now?
--
Ben Dooks http://www.codethink.co.uk/
Senior Engineer Codethink - Providing Genius
https://www.codethink.co.uk/privacy.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists