Hi Thomas,
On jeu., nov. 10 2016, Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Thu, 10 Nov 2016 01:09:50 +0100, Gregory CLEMENT wrote:
>
>> - bootrom {
>> + bootrom@0 {
>> compatible = "marvell,bootrom";
>> reg = <MBUS_ID(0x01, 0x1d) 0 0x100000>;
>
> I am still not sure whether this "0" unit address is correct compared
> to the reg property being passed.
I chose to use the adress register inside the window memory.
>
> A good example of why I'm worried is the sa-sram case:
>
> + crypto_sram0: sa-sram0@0 {
> compatible = "mmio-sram";
> reg = <MBUS_ID(0x09, 0x09) 0 0x800>;
>
> + crypto_sram1: sa-sram1@0 {
> compatible = "mmio-sram";
> reg = <MBUS_ID(0x09, 0x05) 0 0x800>;
>
> The node names should be just "sram" without a number. Indeed for UARTs
> for example, you use uart@XYZ, uart@ABC and not uart0@XYZ and
> uart1@ABC. But then, if you do that, with your scheme, you end up with
> both nodes named sa-sram@0.
>
> Which clearly shows that the way you set this unit-address is not
> correct: those two devices are mapped at completely different
> locations, but you end up with an identical unit address.
>
> I have no idea what is the rule for setting the unit address in this
> case, but I'm pretty sure the rule you've chosen is not good.
I don't know if there is an existing rules for this case. But I see your
concern. What I propose then is to expose the memory windows ID by
adding the target and the attributes like this:
crypto_sram0: sa-sram@09_09_0 {
compatible = "mmio-sram";
reg = <MBUS_ID(0x09, 0x09) 0 0x800>;
crypto_sram1: sa-sram@09_05_0 {
compatible = "mmio-sram";
reg = <MBUS_ID(0x09, 0x05) 0 0x800>;
Gregory
>
> Best regards,
>
> Thomas
> --
> Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
> Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
> http://free-electrons.com
--
Gregory Clement, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
