DT dtc warnings

[Alexandre Belloni]

On 15/12/2017 at 08:34:55 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 8:29 AM, Alexandre Belloni
> <alexandre.belloni at free-electrons.com> wrote:
> > On 15/12/2017 at 08:23:39 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >> On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 12:02 AM, Fabio Estevam <festevam at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 7:19 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk at kernel.org> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Thanks for reply!
> >> >>
> >> >> Isn't this property of a SoC? The registers used by
> >> >> syscon-poweroff/reboot are part of SoC power management unit. It does
> >> >> not refer to any externals. Why then it should be put outside of soc?
> >> >
> >> > If these nodes have registers, then they should have a unit address
> >> > and reg property.
> >>
> >> That's the point - they do not have unit address.
> >>
> >
> > Should they be put under the syscon they are using?
> 
> They are not using syscon but regmap provided by such external IP
> block (for example this:
> http://elixir.free-electrons.com/linux/v4.15-rc3/source/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos3250.dtsi#L153).
> I guess you are proposing something like on imx7s:
> http://elixir.free-electrons.com/linux/v4.15-rc3/source/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx7s.dtsi#L539
> 

Yeah, exactly.

Another example here:
http://elixir.free-electrons.com/linux/v4.15-rc3/source/arch/arm/boot/dts/gemini.dtsi#L32

It seems your poweroff and reboot bits are in registers that are in the
pmu_system_controller so it makes sense to put them under it. I would
even remove the regmap property and get the regmap from the parent
first. This can easily be done while keeping the ABI backward
compatibility.

-- 
Alexandre Belloni, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
http://free-electrons.com