On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 11:17:24AM +0100, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 10:40 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 1:46 PM, Mathieu Malaterre <malat@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> Improve the DTS files by removing all the leading "0x" and zeros to fix the
> >> following dtc warnings:
> >>
> >> Warning (unit_address_format): Node /XXX unit name should not have leading "0x"
> >>
> >> and
> >>
> >> Warning (unit_address_format): Node /XXX unit name should not have leading 0s
> >>
> >> Converted using the following command:
> >>
> >> find . -type f \( -iname *.dts -o -iname *.dtsi \) -exec sed -i -e "s/@\([0-9a-fA-FxX\.;:#]+\)\s*{/@\L\1 {/g" -e "s/@0x\(.*\) {/@\1 {/g" -e "s/@0+\(.*\) {/@\1 {/g" {} +^C
> >>
> >> For simplicity, two sed expressions were used to solve each warnings separately.
> >>
> >> To make the regex expression more robust a few other issues were resolved,
> >> namely setting unit-address to lower case, and adding a whitespace before the
> >> the opening curly brace:
> >>
> >> https://elinux.org/Device_Tree_Linux#Linux_conventions
> >>
> >> This will solve as a side effect warning:
> >>
> >> Warning (simple_bus_reg): Node /XXX@<UPPER> simple-bus unit address format error, expected "<lower>"
> >>
> >> This is a follow up to commit 4c9847b7375a ("dt-bindings: Remove leading 0x from bindings notation")
> >>
> >> Reported-by: David Daney <ddaney@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Suggested-by: Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Acked-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Ack was for different patchset, touching only three files...
>
> So sorry, when I read your email:
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/12/15/152
>
> I assumed you meant for all the Exynos* and S3C* DTS files, but I did
> not check carefully which files were touched originally.
>
> >> Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <malat@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >> arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos3250.dtsi | 34 ++++++------
> >> arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4.dtsi | 56 +++++++++----------
> >> arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4210.dtsi | 8 +--
> >> arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4412-pinctrl.dtsi | 2 +-
> >> arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4412.dtsi | 22 ++++----
> >> arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5.dtsi | 22 ++++----
> >> arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi | 64 +++++++++++-----------
> >> arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5260.dtsi | 26 ++++-----
> >> arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5420.dtsi | 78 +++++++++++++--------------
> >> arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5422-odroid-core.dtsi | 2 +-
> >> arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5440.dtsi | 14 ++---
> >> arch/arm/boot/dts/s3c2416.dtsi | 8 +--
> >> 12 files changed, 168 insertions(+), 168 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos3250.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos3250.dtsi
> >> index 2bd3872221a1..8d47571b3984 100644
> >> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos3250.dtsi
> >> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos3250.dtsi
> >> @@ -164,31 +164,31 @@
> >> syscon = <&pmu_system_controller>;
> >> };
> >>
> >> - pd_cam: cam-power-domain@10023C00 {
> >> + pd_cam: cam-power-domain@10023c00 {
> >
> > This is not related to this patch and it was not present in the
> > version I acked. I also already fixed this here:
> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10113323/
> >
> > There is no changelog explaining the difference in patches. Original
> > patch was okay, why changing it?
>
> Accept my sincere apologizes I really messed this series. I discover
> my original ARM patch did not apply lower case to all unit-address
> equally, so I added at last minute a sed expression to make all
> unit-address lower case.
>
> I guess you can just drop this one for now.
Hi Mathieu,
Do you plan to resend this in its original form (removing 0)?
Best regards,
Krzysztof
--
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
