| Message ID | 20190216235854.15244-2-niklas.soderlund+renesas@ragnatech.se (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Delegated to: | Simon Horman |
| Headers | show |
| Series | arm64: dts: r8a77990-ebisu: small fixes for VIN | expand |
Hi Niklas, Takeshi, On 16/02/2019 23:58, Niklas Söderlund wrote: > From: Takeshi Kihara <takeshi.kihara.df@renesas.com> > > The register address used for the reg property of the adv7482 node in > other Renesas device trees are decimal not hex, change this for Ebisu to > align it with the others. > > Signed-off-by: Takeshi Kihara <takeshi.kihara.df@renesas.com> > [Niklas: rewrite commit message] > Signed-off-by: Niklas Söderlund <niklas.soderlund+renesas@ragnatech.se> > --- > arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77990-ebisu.dts | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77990-ebisu.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77990-ebisu.dts > index 62bdddcbbae7d9e9..23914c2b83965621 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77990-ebisu.dts > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77990-ebisu.dts > @@ -383,7 +383,7 @@ > }; > > port@a { > - reg = <0xa>; > + reg = <10>; From the discussions on this before, we converted the port number to be hex. I really dislike that we have port@a, but reg=<10>; However as long as the value is written by the DTC as 'ten' and correctly interpreted as decimal this is still correct. I guess it doesn't hurt to have a decimal representation as that will then match the bindings port descriptions. It's a shame this can't be the 'port@10' for comprehension though. My only hesitation on providing either an RB/or AB tag here is whether perhaps we should instead convert the salvator-common to use hex so that they match that way instead? -- Regards Kieran > > adv7482_txa: endpoint { > clock-lanes = <0>; >
Hi Kieran, On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 11:13 PM Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com> wrote: > On 16/02/2019 23:58, Niklas Söderlund wrote: > > From: Takeshi Kihara <takeshi.kihara.df@renesas.com> > > > > The register address used for the reg property of the adv7482 node in > > other Renesas device trees are decimal not hex, change this for Ebisu to > > align it with the others. > > > > Signed-off-by: Takeshi Kihara <takeshi.kihara.df@renesas.com> > > [Niklas: rewrite commit message] > > Signed-off-by: Niklas Söderlund <niklas.soderlund+renesas@ragnatech.se> > > --- > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77990-ebisu.dts | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77990-ebisu.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77990-ebisu.dts > > index 62bdddcbbae7d9e9..23914c2b83965621 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77990-ebisu.dts > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77990-ebisu.dts > > @@ -383,7 +383,7 @@ > > }; > > > > port@a { > > - reg = <0xa>; > > + reg = <10>; > > From the discussions on this before, we converted the port number to be hex. > > I really dislike that we have port@a, but reg=<10>; > > However as long as the value is written by the DTC as 'ten' and > correctly interpreted as decimal this is still correct. > > I guess it doesn't hurt to have a decimal representation as that will > then match the bindings port descriptions. It's a shame this can't be > the 'port@10' for comprehension though. > > My only hesitation on providing either an RB/or AB tag here is whether > perhaps we should instead convert the salvator-common to use hex so that > they match that way instead? (More rationale, which may be considered bikeshedding ;-) I believe we tend to use decimal for small numbers, and hex for large numbers. Exceptions are values where the meaning of the individual bits is important, and hex is thus more suitable (e.g. rohm,ddr-backup-power = <0xf>). Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert
Hi Geert, On 18/02/2019 09:01, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Kieran, > > On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 11:13 PM Kieran Bingham > <kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com> wrote: >> On 16/02/2019 23:58, Niklas Söderlund wrote: >>> From: Takeshi Kihara <takeshi.kihara.df@renesas.com> >>> >>> The register address used for the reg property of the adv7482 node in >>> other Renesas device trees are decimal not hex, change this for Ebisu to >>> align it with the others. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Takeshi Kihara <takeshi.kihara.df@renesas.com> >>> [Niklas: rewrite commit message] >>> Signed-off-by: Niklas Söderlund <niklas.soderlund+renesas@ragnatech.se> >>> --- >>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77990-ebisu.dts | 2 +- >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77990-ebisu.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77990-ebisu.dts >>> index 62bdddcbbae7d9e9..23914c2b83965621 100644 >>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77990-ebisu.dts >>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77990-ebisu.dts >>> @@ -383,7 +383,7 @@ >>> }; >>> >>> port@a { >>> - reg = <0xa>; >>> + reg = <10>; >> >> From the discussions on this before, we converted the port number to be hex. >> >> I really dislike that we have port@a, but reg=<10>; >> >> However as long as the value is written by the DTC as 'ten' and >> correctly interpreted as decimal this is still correct. >> >> I guess it doesn't hurt to have a decimal representation as that will >> then match the bindings port descriptions. It's a shame this can't be >> the 'port@10' for comprehension though. >> >> My only hesitation on providing either an RB/or AB tag here is whether >> perhaps we should instead convert the salvator-common to use hex so that >> they match that way instead? > > (More rationale, which may be considered bikeshedding ;-) All input here is helpful :) > I believe we tend to use decimal for small numbers, and hex for large numbers. > Exceptions are values where the meaning of the individual bits is important, > and hex is thus more suitable (e.g. rohm,ddr-backup-power = <0xf>). I believe without the 0x prefix in the reg <> the value is taken as decimal, so keeping decimal will still function correctly. I think my issue only stems from the fact that the @N value is 'hex' without the prefix which causes the difference. I'll stop fussing over this. The value is interpreted correctly, and as I said above - having a place where the port number is listed in decimal helps to match to the bindings table. It's just not in the place I'd like it to be - but I have no control over that. So, lets get this patch in and at least unify the current users ... Acked-by: Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham+renesas@ideasonboard.com> > Gr{oetje,eeting}s, > > Geert >
On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 11:34:13AM +0000, Kieran Bingham wrote: > Hi Geert, > > On 18/02/2019 09:01, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > Hi Kieran, > > > > On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 11:13 PM Kieran Bingham > > <kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com> wrote: > >> On 16/02/2019 23:58, Niklas Söderlund wrote: > >>> From: Takeshi Kihara <takeshi.kihara.df@renesas.com> > >>> > >>> The register address used for the reg property of the adv7482 node in > >>> other Renesas device trees are decimal not hex, change this for Ebisu to > >>> align it with the others. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Takeshi Kihara <takeshi.kihara.df@renesas.com> > >>> [Niklas: rewrite commit message] > >>> Signed-off-by: Niklas Söderlund <niklas.soderlund+renesas@ragnatech.se> > >>> --- > >>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77990-ebisu.dts | 2 +- > >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77990-ebisu.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77990-ebisu.dts > >>> index 62bdddcbbae7d9e9..23914c2b83965621 100644 > >>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77990-ebisu.dts > >>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77990-ebisu.dts > >>> @@ -383,7 +383,7 @@ > >>> }; > >>> > >>> port@a { > >>> - reg = <0xa>; > >>> + reg = <10>; > >> > >> From the discussions on this before, we converted the port number to be hex. > >> > >> I really dislike that we have port@a, but reg=<10>; > >> > >> However as long as the value is written by the DTC as 'ten' and > >> correctly interpreted as decimal this is still correct. > >> > >> I guess it doesn't hurt to have a decimal representation as that will > >> then match the bindings port descriptions. It's a shame this can't be > >> the 'port@10' for comprehension though. > >> > >> My only hesitation on providing either an RB/or AB tag here is whether > >> perhaps we should instead convert the salvator-common to use hex so that > >> they match that way instead? > > > > (More rationale, which may be considered bikeshedding ;-) > > All input here is helpful :) > > > > I believe we tend to use decimal for small numbers, and hex for large numbers. > > Exceptions are values where the meaning of the individual bits is important, > > and hex is thus more suitable (e.g. rohm,ddr-backup-power = <0xf>). > > > I believe without the 0x prefix in the reg <> the value is taken as > decimal, so keeping decimal will still function correctly. > > I think my issue only stems from the fact that the @N value is 'hex' > without the prefix which causes the difference. > > I'll stop fussing over this. The value is interpreted correctly, and as > I said above - having a place where the port number is listed in decimal > helps to match to the bindings table. It's just not in the place I'd > like it to be - but I have no control over that. > > So, lets get this patch in and at least unify the current users ... > > Acked-by: Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham+renesas@ideasonboard.com> Thanks, applied with the subject prefix updated to "arm64: dts: renesas: ebisu:"
Hi Simon, On 2019-02-25 11:09:54 +0100, Simon Horman wrote: [snip] > Thanks, applied with the subject prefix updated to > > "arm64: dts: renesas: ebisu:" You took patch 1/2 from this series but not 2/2. Was that intentional?
On Wed, Mar 06, 2019 at 12:47:36PM +0100, Niklas Söderlund wrote: > Hi Simon, > > On 2019-02-25 11:09:54 +0100, Simon Horman wrote: > [snip] > > Thanks, applied with the subject prefix updated to > > > > "arm64: dts: renesas: ebisu:" > > You took patch 1/2 from this series but not 2/2. Was that intentional? Thanks, that was an oversight. I now have 2/2 too.
On 2019-03-06 14:04:35 +0100, Simon Horman wrote: > On Wed, Mar 06, 2019 at 12:47:36PM +0100, Niklas Söderlund wrote: > > Hi Simon, > > > > On 2019-02-25 11:09:54 +0100, Simon Horman wrote: > > [snip] > > > Thanks, applied with the subject prefix updated to > > > > > > "arm64: dts: renesas: ebisu:" > > > > You took patch 1/2 from this series but not 2/2. Was that intentional? > > Thanks, that was an oversight. I now have 2/2 too. Thanks!
diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77990-ebisu.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77990-ebisu.dts index 62bdddcbbae7d9e9..23914c2b83965621 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77990-ebisu.dts +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a77990-ebisu.dts @@ -383,7 +383,7 @@ }; port@a { - reg = <0xa>; + reg = <10>; adv7482_txa: endpoint { clock-lanes = <0>;