On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 2:20 AM Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 9:50 AM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Can we pull this into driver-core-next please? It fixes issues on some > > > boards with fw_devlink=on. > > > > On r8a77951-salvator-xs.dts, it introduces one more failure: > > > > OF: /soc/i2c@e66d8000/gpio@20/pcie-sata-switch-hog: could not get > > #gpio-cells for /cpus/cpu@102 Geert, One good thing is that it's noticing this being weird and ignoring it in your particular board. I *think* it interprets the "7" as a phandle and that's cpu@102 and realizes it's not a gpio-controller. For at least in your case, it's a safe failure. > > > > Seems like it doesn't parse gpios properties in GPIO hogs correctly. > > Could it be that the code assumes no self-referencing phandles? > (Just guessing...) > Linus, Ok I tried to understand what gpio-hogs means. It's not fully clear to me. But it looks like if a gpio-controller has a gpio-hog, then it doesn't have/need gpio-cells? Is that right? So if a gpio-controller has a gpio-hog, can it ever be referred to by another consumer in DT using blah-gpios = ...? If so, I don't see any obvious code that's handling the missing gpio-cells in this case. Long story short, please help me understand gpio-hog in the context of finding dependencies in DT. Thanks, Saravana
