On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 04:23:20PM +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote: > On 07/29/2013 03:52 PM, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: > > Hi Sebastian, > > > > (Ccing devicetree ML) > > > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 02:36:46PM +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote: > >> On 07/29/2013 02:31 PM, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote: > >>> This adds a MBus node including ranges and pcie apertures required later. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Hesselbarth <[email protected]> > >>> --- > >>> arch/arm/boot/dts/dove.dtsi | 19 +++++++++++++++++++ > >>> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/dove.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/dove.dtsi > >>> index 397674c..bdda016 100644 > >>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/dove.dtsi > >>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/dove.dtsi > >>> @@ -29,6 +29,20 @@ > >>> marvell,tauros2-cache-features = <0>; > >>> }; > >>> > >>> + mbus { > >>> + compatible = "marvell,dove-mbus", "marvell,mbus", "simple-bus"; > >>> + #address-cells = <2>; > >>> + #size-cells = <1>; > >>> + pcie-mem-aperture = <0xe0000000 0x10000000>; /* 256M MEM space > >>> */ > >>> + pcie-io-aperture = <0xf2000000 0x00200000>; /* 2M I/O space > >>> */ > >> > >> Actually, current v9 of the mbus patch set still requires "controller" > >> property to match the corresponding controller node. I had a short > >> discussion with Ezequiel to possibly just use of_find_compatible_node > >> and blindly assumed post-v8 will already use it. > > > > Ah, regarding this: despite your good arguin against the 'controller' > > property approach, > > I still feel a bit inclined for it, as I like the way it tightly-binds the > > two nodes. > > I understand that the phandle property *shows* you that both are > related. But with DT you should always ask for every property, if > (a) it is really required to do the job and (b) does it really > describe the HW or just your SW needs/wishes. >
I see and I understand your point. For some reason it still feels a bit dirty to set this kind of compatible nodes requirement (one node simply requiring another node). I would hate to set a precedent for a dirty solution... Maybe the DT maintainers can shed some light on this? -- Ezequiel García, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android Engineering http://free-electrons.com -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
