On Sun, Mar 08, 2020 at 05:56:43PM +0100, Arkadiusz Drabczyk wrote:
> In check_unit_address_vs_reg() warning message already says 'reg _or_
> ranges' when reg or ranges are present but unit name is missing. Add
> this message for compatibility to say "reg _or_ ranges" when unit name
> is present but neither reg nor ranges are present.
>
> Signed-off-by: Arkadiusz Drabczyk <arkadiusz@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Applied, thanks.
> ---
> checks.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/checks.c b/checks.c
> index 8acbc05..4b3c486 100644
> --- a/checks.c
> +++ b/checks.c
> @@ -352,7 +352,7 @@ static void check_unit_address_vs_reg(struct check *c, struct dt_info *dti,
> FAIL(c, dti, node, "node has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name");
> } else {
> if (unitname[0])
> - FAIL(c, dti, node, "node has a unit name, but no reg property");
> + FAIL(c, dti, node, "node has a unit name, but no reg or ranges property");
> }
> }
> WARNING(unit_address_vs_reg, check_unit_address_vs_reg, NULL);
--
David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_
| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
