Re: [PATCHv4 2/3] ARM: msm: Add support for APQ8074 Dragonboard

[David Brown]

On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 02:33:53PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:

> > "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 ?
>
> Not 100% sure what people will decide on this.  There are a number of
> examples on the PPC side (arch/powerpc/boot/dts) that are soc@ADDR,
> but they don't typically have "reg" properties at the soc level.
>
> Let's go ahead w/o the unit address (as you have it) for now.

What is the address even supposed to mean?  Are we expecting multiple
'soc' nodes?

David
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/