On 23.12.2022 14:05, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 23, 2022 at 01:42:32PM +0100, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>> On 23.12.2022 11:37, Johan Hovold wrote:
>
>>>> + i2c16: i2c@880000 {
>>>> + compatible = "qcom,geni-i2c";
>>>> + reg = <0 0x00880000 0 0x4000>;
>>>> + clocks = <&gcc GCC_QUPV3_WRAP2_S0_CLK>;
>>>> + clock-names = "se";
>>>> + interrupts = <GIC_SPI 373 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
>>>> + #address-cells = <1>;
>>>> + #size-cells = <0>;
>>>
>>> I'm aware that the two current i2c nodes has these two properties here
>>> in the middle, but would you mind moving '#address-cells' and
>>> '#size-cells' after 'reg' instead where I'd expect them to be?
>
>> Hm.. we've been sticking them somewhere near the end for the longest
>> time for every bus-like, or generally "i have childen" type node..
>> I see it's a rather mixed bag in non-qcom SoCs, people just seem to
>> put it wherever they please.. The dt spec doesn't seem to mention any
>> preference fwiw.
>
> The rationale for placing them under 'reg' is that you keep the
> address-related properties together (e.g. 'reg', '#address-cells',
> '#size-cells' and 'ranges').
Okay, I see the point.
Konrad
>
> Johan
