Hello Krzysztof, Patch looks good to me, I have just one question below:
On 04/01/2016 02:57 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > Fix following DTC warnings in all Exynos5250 boards: > > Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node > /dp-controller@145B0000/display-timings/timing@0 has a unit name, but no reg > property > Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /usb@12000000 has a unit name, but no reg > property > Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /usb@12000000/dwc3 has a reg or ranges > property, but no unit name > Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /hdmi has a reg or ranges property, but > no unit name > Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /mixer has a reg or ranges property, but > no unit name > Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /video-phy@10040720 has a unit name, but > no reg property > Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /fixed-regulator@0 has a unit name, but > no reg property > Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /fixed-regulator@1 has a unit name, but > no reg property > Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /fixed-regulator@2 has a unit name, but > no reg property > Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /i2c@12C70000/trackpad has a reg or > ranges property, but no unit name > Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /i2c@12CD0000/lvds-bridge@20/ports/port@0 > has a unit name, but no reg property > Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /i2c@12CD0000/lvds-bridge@20/ports/port@1 > has a unit name, but no reg property > Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /i2c-arbitrator/i2c@0/embedded-controller > has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name > Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /i2c-arbitrator/i2c@0/power-regulator has > a reg or ranges property, but no unit name > Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /i2c@12CA0000/embedded-controller has a > reg or ranges property, but no unit name > > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlow...@samsung.com> > --- [snip] > > - usb@12000000 { > + usb_dwc3 { > compatible = "samsung,exynos5250-dwusb3"; > clocks = <&clock CLK_USB3>; > clock-names = "usbdrd30"; The ePAPR document says that "The name of a node should be somewhat generic, reflecting the function of the device and not its precise programming model" So I wonder if this shouldn't be instead: usb_dwc3: usb { Although it seems that not all DT bindings follow this convention so probably the name in your patch is correct. Reviewed-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <jav...@osg.samsung.com> Best regards, -- Javier Martinez Canillas Open Source Group Samsung Research America