On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 02:29:14AM +0530, Jagan Teki wrote: > On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 10:15 AM, Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote: > > Hi Andre, > > > > On 4 October 2017 at 17:24, Andre Przywara <andre.przyw...@arm.com> wrote: > >> Newer versions of the device tree compiler (rightfully) complain about > >> mismatches between attributed node names (name@<addr>) and a missing > >> reg property in that node. > >> Adjust the FIT build script for 64-bit Allwinner boards to remove the > >> bogus addresses from the node names and avoid the warnings. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przyw...@arm.com> > >> --- > >> board/sunxi/mksunxi_fit_atf.sh | 16 ++++++++-------- > >> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > > > It looks like we have this problem all over the place. The > > documentation in doc/uImage now seems to have this problem too. > > > > I wonder if instead we should add reg / #address-cells / #size-cells > > properties? > > If the update on dts, might be an another-overhead to maintain u-boot > dts wrt Linux dts sync.
Anything that DTC is warning about in a dts that we get from the kernel, should be fixed in the kernel. The kernel dtc is what we're using, and is/will/can also complain about it. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
