Hi Simon,
(pulling in regulator people and DT list)
On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 3:13 AM, Simon Horman <horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 09:33:49AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 2:48 AM, Simon Horman
>> <horms+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > As there is no reg property the regulator nodes should
>> > not include @...
>>
>> You missed an important part of my comment:
>>
>> "However, in the absence of a unit-address, the node name must be unique."
>>
>> > Reported-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> > Signed-off-by: Simon Horman <horms+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> >
>> > ---
>> > v2
>> > * First post
>> > ---
>> > arch/arm/boot/dts/emev2-kzm9d.dts | 4 ++--
>> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/emev2-kzm9d.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/emev2-kzm9d.dts
>> > index 50ccd15..f27fcf0 100644
>> > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/emev2-kzm9d.dts
>> > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/emev2-kzm9d.dts
>> > @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@
>> > bootargs = "console=ttyS1,115200n81 ignore_loglevel root=/dev/nfs ip=dhcp";
>> > };
>> >
>> > - reg_1p8v: regulator@0 {
>> > + reg_1p8v: regulator {
>> > compatible = "regulator-fixed";
>> > regulator-name = "fixed-1.8V";
>> > regulator-min-microvolt = <1800000>;
>> > @@ -36,7 +36,7 @@
>> > regulator-boot-on;
>> > };
>> >
>> > - reg_3p3v: regulator@1 {
>> > + reg_3p3v: regulator {
>> > compatible = "regulator-fixed";
>> > regulator-name = "fixed-3.3V";
>> > regulator-min-microvolt = <3300000>;
>>
>> Now there are two "regulator" nodes.
>>
>> Dtc will not complain, but will assume the second contains overrides for
>> first. "vddvario-supply" and "vdd33a-supply" of node "lan9220@20000000"
>> will both the point to the same node, and the network may not work.
>>
>> You can see this yourself running
>>
>> dtc -I dtb -O dts arch/arm/boot/dts/emev2-kzm9d.dtb
>
> What should we call the nodes?
"regulator0" and "regulator1"?
"regulator1v8" and "regulator3v3"?
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/regulator.txt doesn't mention
node names or (presence/lack of) unit-adresses, but the examples do have
unit-addresses.
Is this another case where we don't follow the "no reg, no unit-address"
ePAPR rule?
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
--
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
