linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 02/11] arm64: dts: mediatek: mt8183: Fix dtb warnings in display graph

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: <CAGXv+5GEdqgbr5yPJ4_7gBKsg8=PkBvFCvarp+=Qcsq8kqWR_A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2026 15:19:41 +0800
From: Chen-Yu Tsai <wenst@...omium.org>
To: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>
Cc: linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, robh@...nel.org, krzk+dt@...nel.org, 
	conor+dt@...nel.org, matthias.bgg@...il.com, sjoerd@...labora.com, 
	hsinyi@...omium.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, kernel@...labora.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/11] arm64: dts: mediatek: mt8183: Fix dtb warnings in
 display graph

On Fri, Jan 9, 2026 at 7:48 PM AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
<angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com> wrote:

No commit message?

> ---
>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8183.dtsi | 119 +++++------------------
>  1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 96 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8183.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8183.dtsi
> index db86e2bd0c7b..676f8ecd89e2 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8183.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8183.dtsi

[...]

> @@ -1904,9 +1880,9 @@ ports {
>                                 #size-cells = <0>;
>
>                                 port@0 {
> -                                       reg = <0>;
>                                         #address-cells = <1>;
>                                         #size-cells = <0>;
> +                                       reg = <0>;

reg should be first or second (when the first property is "compatible")
property under a node.

Ref: "Order of Properties in Device Node" in
     Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dts-coding-style.rst

>
>                                         rdma1_in: endpoint@1 {
>                                                 reg = <1>;
> @@ -1915,9 +1891,9 @@ rdma1_in: endpoint@1 {
>                                 };
>
>                                 port@1 {
> -                                       reg = <1>;
>                                         #address-cells = <1>;
>                                         #size-cells = <0>;
> +                                       reg = <1>;

Same here.

>
>                                         rdma1_out: endpoint@1 {
>                                                 reg = <1>;

[...]

> @@ -2165,9 +2092,9 @@ ports {
>                                 #size-cells = <0>;
>
>                                 port@0 {
> -                                       reg = <0>;
>                                         #address-cells = <1>;
>                                         #size-cells = <0>;
> +                                       reg = <0>;
>
>                                         dpi_in: endpoint@1 {
>                                                 reg = <1>;
> @@ -2176,11 +2103,11 @@ dpi_in: endpoint@1 {
>                                 };
>
>                                 port@1 {
> -                                       reg = <1>;
>                                         #address-cells = <1>;
>                                         #size-cells = <0>;
> +                                       reg = <1>;
>
> -                                       dpi_out: endpoint@1 {
> +                                       dpi_out: endpoint@1  {
>                                                 reg = <1>;
>                                         };
>                                 };

Same for these two blocks.

So all the deletions are correct, but the simple reordering is wrong and
not needed.

Once fixed,

Reviewed-by: Chen-Yu Tsai <wenst@...omium.org>

ChenYu