On Mon, Oct 28, 2024 at 12:43 PM Herve Codina <herve.codina@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Rob, > > On Mon, 28 Oct 2024 08:55:24 -0500 > Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 28, 2024 at 7:24 AM Herve Codina <herve.codina@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > dtc generates the following warnings when building the LAN966x device > > > tree overlay (lan966x_pci.dtso): > > > Warning (simple_bus_reg): /fragment@0/__overlay__/pci-ep-bus@0/cpu_clk: missing or empty reg/ranges property > > > Warning (simple_bus_reg): /fragment@0/__overlay__/pci-ep-bus@0/ddr_clk: missing or empty reg/ranges property > > > Warning (simple_bus_reg): /fragment@0/__overlay__/pci-ep-bus@0/sys_clk: missing or empty reg/ranges property > > > > > > Indeed, related nodes are under the pci-ep-bus (simple-bus) which is not > > > correct. > > > > > > Put them outside this node. > > > > > > Reported-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241025110919.64b1cffb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > > Fixes: 185686beb464 ("misc: Add support for LAN966x PCI device") > > > Signed-off-by: Herve Codina <herve.codina@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > The referenced commit is in the reset tree > > > --- > > > drivers/misc/lan966x_pci.dtso | 36 +++++++++++++++++------------------ > > > 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/misc/lan966x_pci.dtso b/drivers/misc/lan966x_pci.dtso > > > index 7282687df25f..5466d013da7d 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/misc/lan966x_pci.dtso > > > +++ b/drivers/misc/lan966x_pci.dtso > > > @@ -19,6 +19,24 @@ __overlay__ { > > > #address-cells = <3>; > > > #size-cells = <2>; > > > > > > + cpu_clk: cpu_clk { > > > > Preferred node name is "clock-<freq-in-hz>" > > I based the name on the lan966x.dtsi > https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.12-rc1/source/arch/arm/boot/dts/microchip/lan966x.dtsi#L38 That should be fixed too. > Of course, I can rename the cpu_clk, ddr_clk and sys_clk nodes but this will create > a difference against lan966x.dtsi on some points that should be identical. Then maybe they should be sharing a .dtsi? > Let me know with that in mind if I need to rename those nodes in this series. Yes, easier now than later. > > Also, as a general rule, don't use "_" in node names (and properties). > > > > Isn't there a schema for the device which needs these nodes added to > > it? If not, there should be. > > > > No, there is no schema yet for this device. > > How can we describe schema for this kind of devices that are using > device-tree overlays? Describing is not the issue. Running the checks is. Though you can run the checks at runtime. > I mean, this overlay is applied on a PCI device DT node. This DT node is > computed at runtime. It is, in the end, available in the base DT before > applying the overlay. > The compatible string that could be used to check the dtso against schema > cannot be set in the overlay (at least not at the correct place in the > hierarchy) without causing a property memory leak at runtime. An overlay > cannot add a property in a base DT node without generating a memory leak > and so, we avoid adding such properties in the base DT from the overlay. That's a problem with overlays in general which we need to solve at some point. > Is this missing schema blocking for this series ? No. Rob
