Re: [PATCH/RFC dtc 0/2] Drop unit addresses from overlay fragments

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 09:35:15AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> 	Hi all,
> 
> Using "fragment@N" as node name for overlay fragments violates unit
> address rules:
> 
>     <stdout>: Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /fragment@0 has a unit name, but no reg property

Hm, regardless of this patch, that's really a bug in the checks not to
handle overlays as a different case.

The quick fix would be to just suppress that check if an __overlay__
subnode exists.  THe more ambitious approach would be to actually
parse things that look like overlays into their components and apply
checks separately to each fragment (except for ones that don't make
sense except on a fully resolved tree).  I had plans for that, but am
unlikely to get time to work on it any time soon.

> This patch series (for dtc) fixes:
>   1. generation of node names when using overlay sugar syntax,
>   2. all documentation and tests.
> 
> If this is accepted, I'll send similar patches for Linux.
> 
> Note that I've been using "fragment-N" in hand-written DT overlays for
> years, so this is known to work fine with Linux.

Existing tools expecting the @ would be my only concern with this.
You've check Linux is ok, and I've checked libfdt is ok too.  I'm not
really confident if that's enough to call it everything we care about.

-- 
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


[Index of Archives]     [Device Tree Compilter]     [Device Tree Spec]     [Linux Driver Backports]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux PCI Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Yosemite Backpacking]


  Powered by Linux