[PATCH 15/16] Add device tree for Ebony
David Gibson
david at gibson.dropbear.id.au
Wed Feb 14 15:46:41 EST 2007
On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 12:51:06PM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>
> > > > + UIC0: interrupt-controller { /* UIC0 */
> > >
> > > > + #address-cells = <0>;
> > > > + #size-cells = <0>;
> > >
> > > #address-cells = 0 never makes sense.
> >
> > Why not? Children of this node have and need no reg property, and no
> > meaningful address. Sounds like #address-cells = 0 to me.
>
> In fact, not only it does make perfect sense but it's also routinely
> used for ... interrupt controllers :-) That's among others why the
> interrupt map entries "second" part usually doesn't contain the address
> cells.
Oh, btw, I take it you didn't think my method of placing the secondary
UICs under the node for UIC0 was insane.
> > > > + plb {
> > > > + device_type = "soc";
> > > > + compatible = "ibm,plb-440gp", "ibm,plb4";
> > > > + ranges;
> > >
> > > You need a #address-cells, #size-cells here.
> >
> > Why? The values inherited from the root node are perfectly ok here.
>
> Inheriting values is out of spec. The kernel somewhat does it but that's
> a bad habit, we should always have them explicit.
Ah, ok. Values added.
--
David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_
| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list