On Mon, 16 Jan 2023 at 13:23, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 15/01/2023 22:33, Bhupesh Sharma wrote: > > On Sun, 15 Jan 2023 at 20:57, Krzysztof Kozlowski > > <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> On 13/01/2023 21:10, Bhupesh Sharma wrote: > >>> Fix the following '#address-cells' & '#size-cells' related > >>> dt-binding error: > >>> > >>> $ make dtbs_check > >>> > >>> From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/qcom,geni-se.yaml > >>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm4250-oneplus-billie2.dtb: geniqup@4ac0000: > >>> #address-cells:0:0: 2 was expected > >>> From schema: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/qcom,geni-se.yaml > >> > >> Don't we want rather to unify the soc address range? > > > > Well, the assumption in the original dt-bindings was that every reg > > variable is 4 * u32 wide (as most new qcom SoCs set #address- and > > #size-cells to <2>). However, that is not the case for all of the > > SoCs. > > Hm, which device of that SoC cannot be used with address/size cells 2? As noted in the git log already the geniqup on sm6115 / sm4250 cannot be used with address/size cells 2 (See: https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6115.dtsi#L795) > > So, ideally we shouldn't set the "#address-cells" and "#size-cells": > > as const: 2 in the bindings. > > > > See as an example: > > https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/usb-device.yaml > > > How USB device - so entirely different device, not MMIO! - is related here? > > Best regards, > Krzysztof >
