Hello! On 7/12/23 11:14 AM, Conor Dooley wrote: > dtbs_check w/ W=1 complains: > Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): /soc/ethernet@11c20000/ethernet-phy@7: node has a unit name, but no reg or ranges property > Warning (avoid_unnecessary_addr_size): /soc/ethernet@11c20000: unnecessary #address-cells/#size-cells without "ranges" or child "reg" property > > The ethernet@11c20000 node is guarded by an `#if (!SW_ET0_EN_N)` in > rzg2ul-smarc-som.dtsi, where the phy child node is added. In > rzfive-smarc-som.dtsi, the ethernet node is marked disabled & the > interrupt properties are deleted from the phy child node. As a result, > the produced dts looks like: > ethernet@11c20000 { > compatible = "renesas,r9a07g043-gbeth\0renesas,rzg2l-gbeth"; > /* snip */ > #address-cells = <0x01>; > #size-cells = <0x00>; > status = "disabled"; > > ethernet-phy@7 { > }; > }; > > Adding a corresponding `#if (!SW_ET0_EN_N)` around the node in > rzfive-smarc-som.dtsi avoids the complaint, as the empty child node is > not added: > ethernet@11c20000 { > compatible = "renesas,r9a07g043-gbeth\0renesas,rzg2l-gbeth"; > /* snip */ > #address-cells = <0x01>; > #size-cells = <0x00>; > status = "disabled"; > }; > > Signed-off-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> [...] > diff --git a/arch/riscv/boot/dts/renesas/rzfive-smarc-som.dtsi b/arch/riscv/boot/dts/renesas/rzfive-smarc-som.dtsi > index d6f18754eb5d..c62debc7ca7e 100644 > --- a/arch/riscv/boot/dts/renesas/rzfive-smarc-som.dtsi > +++ b/arch/riscv/boot/dts/renesas/rzfive-smarc-som.dtsi > @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ &dmac { > status = "disabled"; > }; > > +#if (!SW_ET0_EN_N) Are the parens really needed here? > ð0 { > status = "disabled"; > [...] MBR, Sergey