On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 07:43:42PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> The k210 devicetrees warn about missing/empty reg and/or ranges
> properties:
> arch/riscv/boot/dts/canaan/k210.dtsi:408.22-460.5: Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): /soc/bus@52000000: node has a unit name, but no reg or ranges property
> arch/riscv/boot/dts/canaan/k210.dtsi:352.22-406.5: Warning (simple_bus_reg): /soc/bus@50400000: missing or empty reg/ranges property
>
> Add reg and ranges properties that naively cap the buses after the
> allocation of their last devices.
>
> Signed-off-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/riscv/boot/dts/canaan/k210.dtsi | 9 ++++++---
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/boot/dts/canaan/k210.dtsi b/arch/riscv/boot/dts/canaan/k210.dtsi
> index 948dc235e39d..6a34dc4f3e51 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/boot/dts/canaan/k210.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/riscv/boot/dts/canaan/k210.dtsi
> @@ -163,7 +163,8 @@ apb0: bus@50200000 {
> #address-cells = <1>;
> #size-cells = <1>;
> compatible = "simple-pm-bus";
> - ranges;
> + regs = <0x50200000 0x200000>;
> + ranges = <0x50200000 0x50200000 0x200000>;
This looks wrong.
The property is called "reg" not "regs".
And I don't think that you should provide "reg" at all,
simply supplying "ranges" should be sufficient, no?
Kind regards,
Niklas
> clocks = <&sysclk K210_CLK_APB0>;
>
> gpio1: gpio@50200000 {
> @@ -382,7 +383,8 @@ apb1: bus@50400000 {
> #address-cells = <1>;
> #size-cells = <1>;
> compatible = "simple-pm-bus";
> - ranges;
> + regs = <0x50400000 0x40100>;
> + ranges = <0x50400000 0x50400000 0x40100>;
> clocks = <&sysclk K210_CLK_APB1>;
>
> wdt0: watchdog@50400000 {
> @@ -437,7 +439,8 @@ apb2: bus@52000000 {
> #address-cells = <1>;
> #size-cells = <1>;
> compatible = "simple-pm-bus";
> - ranges;
> + regs = <0x52000000 0x2000200>;
> + ranges = <0x52000000 0x52000000 0x2000200>;
> clocks = <&sysclk K210_CLK_APB2>;
>
> spi0: spi@52000000 {
> --
> 2.36.1
>
