Quoting Stephen Boyd (2019-01-16 14:49:58) > > > > > > Do we need #size-cells = <2>? Maybe it could be #size-cells = <1> and we > > > can avoid having to specify a second size entry that's always going to > > > be 0 because we don't have devices with huge IO regions in the SoC. Or > > > does it need to be 2 for the large size of the size element of > > > dma-ranges and ranges here? Looking at the code I think we can rely on > > > the size-cells of the parent node so I think it will work with size of 1 > > > here. > > > > > > > The "length" part of dma-ranges is described using #size-cells number of > > cells, so with 1 there's no way we can describe this being 36 bits. > > Yes, but doesn't the #size-cells of the parent node (i.e. root node in > this case) dictate the number of cells of the "length" part of the > dma-ranges property here? I hope that we don't need to push down the > larger size of 2 just for this reason, but I admit I haven't run the > code to understand this all properly. > Ok, nevermind. I read the code more and looked at the spec and I'm just talking nonsense on this point.
