On 08-02-22, 14:05, Rob Herring wrote: > On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 10:38:37PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote: > > > > > > The problem comes with all these nodes having same unit addresses. This > > is adding to ~2K warning for unique_unit_address upstream. > > This is with W=1, right? Yes > > > So to solve this we thought of creating a qup se node and then query the > > protocol supported from the firmware on boot and create a child > > auxillary_device. The problem with that approach is another warning > > "node name for SPI buses should be 'spi'"! So that would not help > > > > Now, I cant think of any better idea here, except maybe move these to > > respective board dts and perhaps keep them commented here for > > documentation. > > > > Do we have any better idea to solve this problem? > > There is another dtc warning option called > unique_unit_address_if_enabled which we could enable under W=1 instead > of unique_unit_address. Even that option has too many warnings to enable > by default. Bjorn pointed me to your proposal https://www.irccloud.com/pastebin/OnYqVn6p/ with this change I do get a better stats for warnings which we can focus on reducing :) Before: 6483 unique_unit_address\n\ 1108 simple_bus_reg\n\ 764 avoid_unnecessary_addr_size\n\ 712 unit_address_vs_reg\n\ 120 graph_child_address\n\ 32 unique_unit_address_if_enabled After: 277 simple_bus_reg\n\ 191 avoid_unnecessary_addr_size\n\ 178 unit_address_vs_reg\n\ 32 unique_unit_address_if_enabled\n\ 30 graph_child_address So, it would be helpful for now to merge this. Thanks -- ~Vinod
