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 >