Hi,
On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 8:52 PM Bjorn Andersson
<bjorn.andersson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Thu 13 Dec 14:17 PST 2018, Doug Anderson wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 12:58 AM Sibi Sankar <sibis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> [..]
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi
> > > index 58870273dbc9..df16ee464872 100644
> > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi
> > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi
> > > @@ -1095,6 +1095,69 @@
> > > };
> > > };
> > >
> > > + remoteproc@4080000 {
> > > + compatible = "qcom,sdm845-mss-pil";
> > > + reg = <0x04080000 0x408>, <0x04180000 0x48>;
> >
> > s/0x04080000/0x4080000 to appease the DT folks.
> >
>
> Andy requests this to be padded to 8 digits, and I've come to really
> appreciate this as it makes sorting much easier.
>
> But perhaps there's a verdict on this?
Hrm. First I've heard of that. ...and all of the other addresses in
this file aren't padded to 8 digits. Ugh. I could submit a patch to
fix them all (I actually like them padded too) but given the current
number of outstanding patches against sdm845.dtsi it's just going to
cause lots of merge conflicts?
I thought it was general DT practice to always omit leading zeros but
I just searched and it appears that policy only applies to unit
addresses. Specifically I note that in
<https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180111060004.9333-1-bjorn.andersson@xxxxxxxxxx>
Rob H asked you to remove the leading zero from the unit address but
_not_ the "reg". So I guess padding the reg to 8 digits is OK.
tl;dr: Sure, keep the padding the 8 digits here and eventually we can
fix-up the other nodes when there's not so much churn to sdm845.dtsi
(or maybe Andy can do it himself?) Sound like a plan?
-Doug
