On Thu, May 30, 2024 at 2:21 PM Conor Dooley <conor@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, May 30, 2024 at 01:50:48PM -0500, Rob Herring (Arm) wrote: > > While OpenFirmware originally allowed default values of #address-cells > > and #size-cells, FDT has long required explicit values. It's been a > > warning in dtc for the root node since the beginning (2005) and for > > any parent node since 2007. Of course, not all FDT uses dtc, but that > > should be the majority by far. The various extracted OF devicetrees I > > have dating back to the 1990s (various PowerMac, OLPC, PASemi Nemo) > > all have explicit root node properties. > > > > I have no idea what exists for Sparc, so disabling the warning for it. > > If any other platforms hit the warning, then the warning can be > > disabled for them. > > > > Signed-off-by: Rob Herring (Arm) <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > Sparc folks, If anyone can dump DTs from some Sparc systems it would be > > helpful. > > --- > > drivers/of/base.c | 2 ++ > > drivers/of/fdt.c | 2 ++ > > 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/of/base.c b/drivers/of/base.c > > index 61fff13bbee5..6930aa29fec1 100644 > > --- a/drivers/of/base.c > > +++ b/drivers/of/base.c > > @@ -96,6 +96,7 @@ int of_bus_n_addr_cells(struct device_node *np) > > return cells; > > > > /* No #address-cells property for the root node */ > > + WARN_ONCE(!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SPARC), "Only listed platforms should rely on default '#address-cells'\n"); > > I assume "listed platforms" means things in the first parameter of > WARN_ONCE()? Since that's only SPARC, why not just say it? The error > message is rather obtuse as-is I think. My intent is if you hit this warning, add the platform here. I imagine it will be older stuff we can't or don't want to fix. Maybe I should just say that as a comment instead. Rob
