lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Sep]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCHv4 2/3] ARM: msm: Add support for APQ8074 Dragonboard
On 9/26/2013 11:05 AM, Rohit Vaswani wrote:
> On 9/26/2013 9:37 AM, Kumar Gala wrote:
>> <snip>
>
>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-apq8074-dragonboard.dts
>> @@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
>> +/include/ "qcom-msm8974.dtsi"
>> +
>> +/ {
>> + model = "Qualcomm APQ8074 Dragonboard";
>> + compatible = "qcom,apq8074-dragonboard", "qcom,apq8074";
>> +};
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-msm8974.dtsi
>> b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-msm8974.dtsi
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..f04b643
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-msm8974.dtsi
>> @@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
>> +/dts-v1/;
>> +
>> +/include/ "skeleton.dtsi"
>> +
>> +/ {
>> + model = "Qualcomm MSM8974";
>> + compatible = "qcom,msm8974";
>> + interrupt-parent = <&intc>;
>> +
>> + soc: soc { };
>>>> We should have a unit address here:
>>>>
>>>> soc: soc@FOOBAR {
>>>>
>>>> also, split out the curly braces so any future patches do have to
>>>> muck with that.
>>>>
>>>> };
>>>>
>>> Im not sure I understand the reasoning behind the unit address for
>>> soc ?
>> Its fairly standard practice and there is a fair amount of discussion
>> about the lack of a unit address for memory nodes.
>>
> That still doesn't really answer anything :) - and I couldn't find any
> discussions about this either.
> I don't see anybody in upstream adding an address to soc except sun.
> What is that address supposed to be for - what does it mean ?
> The soc is way of encapsulating meaningful blocks for the particular
> SoC.

I see the mail from Stephen Warren for adding a check stating that

"ePAPR 1.1 section 2.2.1.1 "Node Name Requirements" specifies that any
node that has a reg property must include a unit address in its name
with value matching the first entry in its reg property. Conversely, if
a node does not have a reg property, the node name must not include a
unit address."

The soc node we have does not have a reg property ?


>
>>
>>>>> +};
>>>>> +
>>>>> +&soc {
>>>>> + #address-cells = <1>;
>>>>> + #size-cells = <1>;
>>>>> + ranges;
>>>>> + compatible = "simple-bus";
>>>>> +
>>>>> + intc: interrupt-controller@f9000000 {
>>>>> + compatible = "qcom,msm-qgic2";
>>>>> + interrupt-controller;
>>>>> + #interrupt-cells = <3>;
>>>>> + reg = <0xf9000000 0x1000>,
>>>>> + <0xf9002000 0x1000>;
>>>>> + };
>>>>> +
>>>>> + timer {
>>>>> + compatible = "arm,armv7-timer";
>>>>> + interrupts = <1 2 0xf08>,
>>>>> + <1 3 0xf08>,
>>>>> + <1 4 0xf08>,
>>>>> + <1 1 0xf08>;
>>>>> + clock-frequency = <19200000>;
>>>>> + };
>>>>> +};
>> - k
>>
>
>
> Thanks,
> Rohit Vaswani
>


Thanks,
Rohit Vaswani

--
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-09-26 21:41    [W:0.488 / U:0.024 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site