[PATCH 1/3] arm64: dts: ti: k3-j7200-main: Add gpio nodes in main domain

[Sekhar Nori]

On 14/11/20 9:45 AM, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
> Hi
> 
> On 13/11/2020 22:55, Nishanth Menon wrote:
>> On 00:39-20201114, Sekhar Nori wrote:
>>>
>>> I was using the latest schema from master. But I changed to 2020.08.1
>>> also, and still don't see the warning.
>>>
>>> $ dt-doc-validate --version
>>> 2020.12.dev1+gab5a73fcef26
>>>
>>> I dont have a system-wide dtc installed. One in kernel tree is updated.
>>>
>>> $ scripts/dtc/dtc --version
>>> Version: DTC 1.6.0-gcbca977e
>>>
>>> Looking at your logs, it looks like you have more patches than just this
>>> applied. I wonder if thats making a difference. Can you check with just
>>> these patches applied to linux-next or share your tree which includes
>>> other patches?
>>>
>>> In your logs, you have such error for other interrupt controller nodes
>>> as well. For example:
>>>
>>>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j7200-main.dtsi:
>>> /bus at 100000/bus at 30000000/interrupt-controller1: Missing #address-cells
>>> in interrupt provider
>>>
>>> Which I don't see in my logs. My guess is some other patch(es) in your
>>> patch stack either uncovers this warning or causes it.
>>
>> Oh boy! I sent you and myself on wild goose chase! Really sorry about
>> messing up in the report of bug.
>>
>> It is not dtbs_check, it is building dtbs with W=2 that generates this
>> warning. dtc 1.6.0 is sufficient to reproduce this behavior.
>>
>> Using v5.10-rc1 as baseline (happens the same with next-20201113 as
>>         well.
>>
>> v5.10-rc1: https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/Pn9HDqRjQ4/ (recording:
>>      https://asciinema.org/a/55YVpql9Bq8rh8fePTxI2xObO)
>>
>> v5.10-rc1 + 1st patch in the series(since we are testing):
>>     https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/QWQRMSv565/ (recording:
>> https://asciinema.org/a/ZSKZkOY13l4lmZ2xWH34jMlM1)
>>
>> Diff: https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/239sYYT2QY/
>>
> 
> This warning come from scripts/dtc/checks.c
> and was introduced by commit 3eb619b2f7d8 ("scripts/dtc: Update to
> upstream version v1.6.0-11-g9d7888cbf19c").
> 
> In my opinion it's false warning as there is no requirement to have 
> #address-cells in interrupt provider node.
> by the way, above commit description says: "The interrupt_provider check
> is noisy, so turn it off for now."

Adding Andre who adding this check in upstream dtc for guidance.

It looks like address-cells makes sense only if there is an
interrupt-map specified as well. Since we don't use it, I can add

#address-cells = <0>;

to silence the warning. Let me know if there is a better way to deal
with this.

Thanks,
Sekhar