On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 04:11:25PM +0200, Heiko Schocher wrote: > Hello Tom, > > Am 21.04.2016 um 15:53 schrieb Tom Rini: > >On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 03:50:28PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote: > >>On 04/21/2016 03:35 PM, Simon Glass wrote: > >>>Hi, > >>> > >>>On 21 April 2016 at 07:25, Marek Vasut <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>On 04/21/2016 03:17 PM, Heiko Schocher wrote: > >>>>>Hello Marek, > >>>>> > >>>>>Am 21.04.2016 um 14:51 schrieb Marek Vasut: > >>>>>>On 04/21/2016 02:48 PM, Heiko Schocher wrote: > >>>>>>>suppress a lot of > >>>>>>>"reg or ranges property, but no unit name" warnings, > >>>>>>>through the dtc compiler flag "-Wno-unit_address_vs_reg". > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>If all DTS are fixed, we can remove this flag again. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>Signed-off-by: Heiko Schocher <[email protected]> > >>>>>>>--- > >>>>>>>There is also a solution to suppress warnings from > >>>>>>>the dtc compiler by the "-q" flag, but that would > >>>>>>>suppress all warnings. Not realy what I want. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>Yep > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>With this patch and patch: > >>>>>>>http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/609150/ > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>travis build passes, see: > >>>>>>>https://travis-ci.org/hsdenx/u-boot/builds/124723016 > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> arch/arc/dts/Makefile | 2 ++ > >>>>>>> arch/arm/dts/Makefile | 3 ++- > >>>>>>> arch/microblaze/dts/Makefile | 2 ++ > >>>>>>> arch/mips/dts/Makefile | 3 ++- > >>>>>>> arch/nios2/dts/Makefile | 2 ++ > >>>>>>> arch/powerpc/dts/Makefile | 2 ++ > >>>>>>> arch/sandbox/dts/Makefile | 2 ++ > >>>>>>> arch/x86/dts/Makefile | 2 ++ > >>>>>>> 8 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > >>>>>> > >>>>>>Isn't there some common place in scripts/ or so where we can disable > >>>>>>this warning using an one-liner ? > >>>>> > >>>>>I don;t know ... but I prefer to disable this per arch .. so we can > >>>>>enable the check back if one arch is fixed ... > >>>> > >>>>In my opinion, we should stick to the same behavior Linux does. > >>>>Ccing a few more people. > >>> > >>>Wouldn't it be better to fix the problems? > >> > >>My impression was that these warnings are just the result of > >>over-eagerness of DTC, that's why Linux prints them only if you > >>increase the W= (warning) verbosity. I might be wrong tho. > > > >They are minor problems. For the vast majority of the dts files we > >have, the fixes will come in via re-syncs with the kernel and in at > >least some cases it's not just a simple regex but also "oh, lets give > >things better names". With respect to dts files that we really do own > >(ie x86) yes, we should fix them. > > So, this patch from me could be still an option? > > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/610866/ > > (at least for the sandbox fixes?) > (I have a v2 where I worked in the comments from Bin ...)
Yes, but I want to make sure we think about the renames and aren't trying to silence the warning. I'm sorry but the MIPS "fixes" have me leery of other blind changes. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
