Re: [PATCH v3] checks: Remove check for graph child addresses

David Gibson <[email protected]> Tue, 19 Aug 2025 09:37:42 +1000

Newsgroups	org.kernel.vger.devicetree-compiler,org.kernel.vger.linux-renesas-soc
Message-ID	<aKO5RosG6zeIjZKu@zatzit>

On Sun, Aug 17, 2025 at 03:37:33PM +0200, Niklas Söderlund wrote:
> The dtc graph_child_address check can't distinguish between bindings
> where there can only be a single endpoint, and cases where there can be
> multiple endpoints.
> 
> In cases where the bindings allow for multiple endpoints but only one is
> described false warnings about unnecessary #address-cells/#size-cells
> can be generated, but only if the endpoint described have an address of
> 0 (A), for single endpoints with a non-zero address (B) no warnings are
> generated.
> 
> A)
>     ports {
> 	#address-cells = <1>;
> 	#size-cells = <0>;
> 
> 	port@0 {
> 	    #address-cells = <1>;
> 	    #size-cells = <0>;
> 
> 	    sourceA: endpoint@0 {
> 		reg = <0>
> 	    };
> 	};
>     };
> 
> B)
>     ports {
> 	#address-cells = <1>;
> 	#size-cells = <0>;
> 
> 	port@0 {
> 	    #address-cells = <1>;
> 	    #size-cells = <0>;
> 
> 	    sourceB: endpoint@1 {
> 		reg = <1>
> 	    };
> 	};
>     };
> 
> Remove the check as it is somewhat redundant now that we can use schemas
> to validate the full node.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Niklas Söderlund <[email protected]>
> Reviewed-by: Rob Herring (Arm) <[email protected]>

Applied, thanks.

-- 
David Gibson (he or they)	| 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

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 833 B)