On Wednesday 12 June 2013 12:07:46 Grant Likely wrote:
>
> It actually seems a bit silly to put the internal regs into the ranges
> property at all. It's not like they need to be translated or provided to
> any child nodes. Just give the root node a reg property with the correct
> base for the internal regs.
I think you are missing some background about the internal-regs:
* These are SoC-wide registers including the UART and other things, not
just the mbus setup
* There are at least two different values used for the internal-regs
mapping address depending on the SoC and boot loader version
* We have to get the address from the DT since it is impossible to
probe or change without knowing the current setting: The internal-regs
also contains the registers in mbus used to relocate the internal-regs.
> As for regenerating the ranges; I have no problem with the kernel
> allocating ranges at runtime, but that code should not be creating a new
> ranges property and adding it to the tree. The knowledge should be kept
> internal to the driver and it should use an of_bus translator
> (drivers/of/address.c) to tap into the ranges parsings code.
Ok, makes sense. I didn't know about the of_bus code. Thanks for the
pointer!
Arnd
_______________________________________________
devicetree-discuss mailing list
devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss
