[Skiboot] [PATCH] hdata: Fix dtc warnings

[Vasant Hegde]

On 06/25/2018 12:48 PM, Oliver wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 23, 2018 at 4:48 PM, Vasant Hegde
> <hegdevasant at linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>> Fix dtc warnings related to mcbist node.
>>
>> Warning (reg_format): "reg" property in /xscom at 623fc00000000/mcbist at 1 has invalid length (4 bytes) (#address-cells == 1, #size-cells == 1)
>> Warning (reg_format): "reg" property in /xscom at 623fc00000000/mcbist at 2 has invalid length (4 bytes) (#address-cells == 1, #size-cells == 1)
>> Warning (reg_format): "reg" property in /xscom at 603fc00000000/mcbist at 1 has invalid length (4 bytes) (#address-cells == 1, #size-cells == 1)
>> Warning (reg_format): "reg" property in /xscom at 603fc00000000/mcbist at 2 has invalid length (4 bytes) (#address-cells == 1, #size-cells == 1)
>>
>> Ideally we should add proper xscom range here... but we are not getting that
>> information in HDAT today. Lets fix warning until we get proper data in HDAT.
> 
> The HDAT spec seems to use "MCBIST" to mean MC chiplet, so you could
> use the base address of each chiplet rather than making one up. I did
> some digging and found that:
> 
> MC01 (mcbist0) is at 0x7000000
> MC23 (mcbist1) is at 0x8000000

Where did you get this info? HDAT doesn't mention this.

> 
> That said our hierarchy doesn't make a whole lot of sense since the
> MCSes are part of the nest chiplets rather than the MC chiplets. What
> actually consumes this data? Does it care about the exact hierarchy or
> does it just look at the dimm@ nodes at the bottom?

Google wanted the hierarchy. Hence I added like mcbist/mcs/mca/dimm.

-Vasant