| Message ID | 59E7D6E0.5030109@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 5:34 PM, Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com> wrote: > On 10/18/17 13:16, Rob Herring wrote: >> Use devicetree-compiler list for dtc issues please. >> >> On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Hi Rob, Alan, >>> >>> On 10/18/17 08:58, Alan Tull wrote: >>>> Hi Rob, >>>> >>>> I've noticed a problem compiling DT overlays and traced it back to >>>> beginning in next-20171009 >>>> >>>> That tag adds the following in scripts/dtc >>>> >>>> e9480c1 2017-10-09 16:17:32 +0100 : Mark Brown : Merge remote-tracking >>>> branch 'devicetree/for-next' >>>> 4201d05 2017-10-03 15:03:47 -0500 : Rob Herring : scripts/dtc: Update >>>> to upstream version v1.4.5-3-gb1a60033c110 >>>> 4322323 2017-10-03 15:03:46 -0500 : Rob Herring : scripts/dtc: add >>>> fdt_overlay.c and fdt_addresses.c to sync script >>>> >>>> The error is: >>>> >>>> dtc: /home/atull/repos/linux-socfpga/scripts/dtc/livetree.c:543: >>>> get_node_by_phandle: Assertion `(phandle != 0) && (phandle != -1)' >>>> failed. >>>> arch/arm/boot/dts/socfpga_overlay.dtb: Warning (clocks_property): >>>> Could not get phandle node for >>>> /fragment@0/__overlay__/gpio@10040:clocks(cell 0) >>>> Aborted (core dumped) >>>> scripts/Makefile.lib:316: recipe for target >>>> 'arch/arm/boot/dts/socfpga_arria10_socdk_sdmmc_ghrd_ovl_ext_cfg.dtb' >>>> failed >>>> make[2]: *** [arch/arm/boot/dts/socfpga_arria10_socdk_sdmmc_ghrd_ovl_ext_cfg.dtb] >>>> Error 134 >>>> arch/arm/Makefile:346: recipe for target 'dtbs' failed >>>> >>>> Here's a simplified overlay that gets this error. Taking out the line >>>> "interrupt-parent = <&intc>;" fixes the build. >>>> >>>> /dts-v1/; >>>> /plugin/; >>>> / { >>>> fragment@0 { >>>> target-path = "/soc/base_fpga_region"; >>>> #address-cells = <1>; >>>> #size-cells = <1>; >>>> >>>> __overlay__ { >>>> ranges = <0x00000000 0x00000000 0xc0000000 0x00040000>, >>>> <0x00000001 0x00000000 0xff200000 0x00001000>; >>>> >>>> external-fpga-config; >>>> >>>> #address-cells = <2>; >>>> #size-cells = <1>; >>>> >>>> fpga_pr_region0 { >>>> compatible = "fpga-region"; >>>> fpga-bridges = <&freeze_controller_0>; >>>> ranges; >>>> }; >>>> >>>> freeze_controller_0: freeze_controller@0x100000450 { >>>> compatible = "altr,freeze-bridge-controller"; >>>> reg = <0x00000001 0x00000450 0x00000010>; >>>> interrupt-parent = <&intc>; /* <-- >>>> remove to fix build */ >>>> interrupts = <0 21 4>; >>>> }; >>>> }; >>>> }; >>>> }; >>>> >>>> Alan >>> >>> Phandle references in overlays are assigned the value of -1 (0xffffffff) in >>> the dtb, to be fixed up when loaded. A new check sees this value and >>> triggers the assert. >>> >>> It is this commit in the upstream dtc tools tree: >>> >>> commit ee3d26f6960bb5922d9a35fe266d9eac74a78ec0 >>> checks: add interrupts property check >>> >>> There are a bunch of other new checks that call get_node_by_phandle(), >>> and thus could trigger the assertion. >>> >>> I'm guessing that those checks would also trigger the assert if an >>> overlay contained something that would lead to one of the other checks >>> being processed. >> >> You won't get an assert because I check for 0 or -1 and skip the check >> in those cases. The interrupts check missed that condition. > > Awesome, thank for confirming that. That means the temporary work around > is quite easy. > >> >> However, as shown above, you will get an erroneous warning because it >> just skips 1 cell and goes to the next to handle the case where the >> phandle is optional and you want a fixed number of elements. > > Just for those reading along at home, with the one warning disabled, the > messages become: > > $ dtc -Wno-interrupts_property socfpga_arria10_socdk_sdmmc_ghrd_ovl_ext_cfg.dts >junk.dtb > <stdout>: Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /fragment@0 has a unit name, but no reg property > <stdout>: Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /fragment@0/__overlay__ has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name Look like errors to me. >> I guess we can't validate overlays which is unfortunate. I don't think >> that's a solvable problem unless you have the base DT. > > Yes, maybe. But there are still some useful warnings for overlays, maybe. I'm > not sure what the implications of the "range_format" warning that I will show > below are (I'd actually have to spend a few minutes thinking about ranges, and > I don't have the cycles right now). Well, yes all the simple localized checks should work, but as we add more complex checks with either dtc or the schema we'll have after ELCE next week there's a lot we can't validate. Perhaps we have to place some restrictions on overlays so we can validate them better. I do wonder if we could add tags to phandles to make them identifiable. Perhaps making them all 0xFF?????? instead of starting at 1. 2^24 phandles should be enough for anyone(TM). That would not completely solve this problem, but then we could at least find the phandles in a property. Rob -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fpga" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 03:34:08PM -0700, Frank Rowand wrote: > On 10/18/17 13:16, Rob Herring wrote: > > Use devicetree-compiler list for dtc issues please. > > > > On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Rob, Alan, > >> > >> On 10/18/17 08:58, Alan Tull wrote: > >>> Hi Rob, > >>> > >>> I've noticed a problem compiling DT overlays and traced it back to > >>> beginning in next-20171009 > >>> > >>> That tag adds the following in scripts/dtc > >>> > >>> e9480c1 2017-10-09 16:17:32 +0100 : Mark Brown : Merge remote-tracking > >>> branch 'devicetree/for-next' > >>> 4201d05 2017-10-03 15:03:47 -0500 : Rob Herring : scripts/dtc: Update > >>> to upstream version v1.4.5-3-gb1a60033c110 > >>> 4322323 2017-10-03 15:03:46 -0500 : Rob Herring : scripts/dtc: add > >>> fdt_overlay.c and fdt_addresses.c to sync script > >>> > >>> The error is: > >>> > >>> dtc: /home/atull/repos/linux-socfpga/scripts/dtc/livetree.c:543: > >>> get_node_by_phandle: Assertion `(phandle != 0) && (phandle != -1)' > >>> failed. > >>> arch/arm/boot/dts/socfpga_overlay.dtb: Warning (clocks_property): > >>> Could not get phandle node for > >>> /fragment@0/__overlay__/gpio@10040:clocks(cell 0) > >>> Aborted (core dumped) > >>> scripts/Makefile.lib:316: recipe for target > >>> 'arch/arm/boot/dts/socfpga_arria10_socdk_sdmmc_ghrd_ovl_ext_cfg.dtb' > >>> failed > >>> make[2]: *** [arch/arm/boot/dts/socfpga_arria10_socdk_sdmmc_ghrd_ovl_ext_cfg.dtb] > >>> Error 134 > >>> arch/arm/Makefile:346: recipe for target 'dtbs' failed > >>> > >>> Here's a simplified overlay that gets this error. Taking out the line > >>> "interrupt-parent = <&intc>;" fixes the build. > >>> > >>> /dts-v1/; > >>> /plugin/; > >>> / { > >>> fragment@0 { > >>> target-path = "/soc/base_fpga_region"; > >>> #address-cells = <1>; > >>> #size-cells = <1>; > >>> > >>> __overlay__ { > >>> ranges = <0x00000000 0x00000000 0xc0000000 0x00040000>, > >>> <0x00000001 0x00000000 0xff200000 0x00001000>; > >>> > >>> external-fpga-config; > >>> > >>> #address-cells = <2>; > >>> #size-cells = <1>; > >>> > >>> fpga_pr_region0 { > >>> compatible = "fpga-region"; > >>> fpga-bridges = <&freeze_controller_0>; > >>> ranges; > >>> }; > >>> > >>> freeze_controller_0: freeze_controller@0x100000450 { > >>> compatible = "altr,freeze-bridge-controller"; > >>> reg = <0x00000001 0x00000450 0x00000010>; > >>> interrupt-parent = <&intc>; /* <-- > >>> remove to fix build */ > >>> interrupts = <0 21 4>; > >>> }; > >>> }; > >>> }; > >>> }; > >>> > >>> Alan > >> > >> Phandle references in overlays are assigned the value of -1 (0xffffffff) in > >> the dtb, to be fixed up when loaded. A new check sees this value and > >> triggers the assert. > >> > >> It is this commit in the upstream dtc tools tree: > >> > >> commit ee3d26f6960bb5922d9a35fe266d9eac74a78ec0 > >> checks: add interrupts property check > >> > >> There are a bunch of other new checks that call get_node_by_phandle(), > >> and thus could trigger the assertion. > >> > >> I'm guessing that those checks would also trigger the assert if an > >> overlay contained something that would lead to one of the other checks > >> being processed. > > > > You won't get an assert because I check for 0 or -1 and skip the check > > in those cases. The interrupts check missed that condition. > > Awesome, thank for confirming that. That means the temporary work around > is quite easy. > > > > > However, as shown above, you will get an erroneous warning because it > > just skips 1 cell and goes to the next to handle the case where the > > phandle is optional and you want a fixed number of elements. > > Just for those reading along at home, with the one warning disabled, the > messages become: > > $ dtc -Wno-interrupts_property socfpga_arria10_socdk_sdmmc_ghrd_ovl_ext_cfg.dts >junk.dtb > <stdout>: Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /fragment@0 has a unit name, but no reg property > <stdout>: Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /fragment@0/__overlay__ has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name Ah.. yeah.. we should put in explicit handling of this. The top level nodes in an overlay don't really obey the normal DT rules, so we shouldn't apply the checks to them in the same way. This, incidentally was a major part of why I want to change overlay construction so it's done as a separate pass, rather than during the parse: that way we can apply the checks separately to each fragment before we assemble them, which I think will work better in most cases. (well, actually, the plan was to have two groups of checks - some that run before overlay assembly, some after). I made a start on this in the 'overlay' branch, but I never got a chance to finish it. > > I guess we can't validate overlays which is unfortunate. I don't think > > that's a solvable problem unless you have the base DT. > > Yes, maybe. But there are still some useful warnings for overlays, maybe. I'm > not sure what the implications of the "range_format" warning that I will show > below are (I'd actually have to spend a few minutes thinking about ranges, and > I don't have the cycles right now). > > > > > >> You can avoid the problem in your example dts with "-Wno-interrupts_property" > >> > >> dtc -Wno-interrupts_property fpga_01_a.dts > >> > >> The larger set of other checks that might trigger the assert is too large > >> for me to want to add "-Wno-" flags for all of them to the command line > >> (as temporary workarounds). > > > > David thought more switches were better. > > Yep. Not a complaint, just an observation about a _temporary_ workaround. > > > > > > Rob > > > > > Here is the "range_format" warning I mentioned above. The dts file that > started this thread hand crafts what is internal overlay data, which > should be generated by the dtc compiler instead of being hand coded in > the dts. If I remove the hand coded stuff and let dtc generate the > internal overlay data, the dtc messages become (use a wide window to > avoid line wrapping): > > $ dtc -Wno-interrupts_property fpga_01_a.dts >junk.dtb > <stdout>: Warning (ranges_format): "ranges" property in /fragment@0/__overlay__ has invalid length (32 bytes) (parent #address-cells == 2, child #address-cells == 2, #size-cells == 1) This is a false positive. Correctly parsing the ranges property requires knowing the parent node's #address-cells and #size-cells. In the case of an overlay, we don't know the real parent until it's applied, so we can't check this. So this probably needs another change to skip this test on the top node of any overlay fragment. Again, this would be easier if overlay juggling was in a separate pass. > <stdout>: Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /fragment@0 has a unit name, but no reg property > <stdout>: Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /fragment@0/__overlay__ has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name > <stdout>: Warning (avoid_default_addr_size): Relying on default #address-cells value for /fragment@0/__overlay__ > <stdout>: Warning (avoid_default_addr_size): Relying on default #size-cells value for /fragment@0/__overlay__ > > > The second through last warning are about the format of the internal > data structure, and hopefully could just be suppressed. I don't > know how easy or hard that would be to implement - I am very much > not a dtc internals expert. Right, we shouldn't be applying these checks to nodes that are part of the overlay metadata rather than "real" nodes. > The first warning says something about what the overlay source dts > contains. Here is what the original dts source looks like when > transformed to not contain the hand crafted internal overlay data: > > $ cat fpga_01_a.dts > /dts-v1/; > /plugin/; > > // This assumes an existing label in the base dts > // whose location is "/soc/base_fpga_region" > &fpga_region { > > ranges = <0x00000000 0x00000000 0xc0000000 0x00040000>, > <0x00000001 0x00000000 0xff200000 0x00001000>; > > external-fpga-config; > > #address-cells = <2>; > #size-cells = <1>; > > fpga_pr_region0 { > compatible = "fpga-region"; > fpga-bridges = <&freeze_controller_0>; > ranges; > }; > > freeze_controller_0: freeze_controller@100000450 { > compatible = "altr,freeze-bridge-controller"; > reg = <0x00000001 0x00000450 0x00000010>; > interrupt-parent = <&intc>; /* <-- remove to fix build */ > interrupts = <0 21 4>; > }; > }; > > Of course, if this was a real transformation, I would remove all the > extra tabbing. But the current form makes it easier to see that all > of the stuff that is highly indented is unchanged from the original > dts file. > > $ diff -u socfpga_arria10_socdk_sdmmc_ghrd_ovl_ext_cfg.dts fpga_01_a.dts > --- socfpga_arria10_socdk_sdmmc_ghrd_ovl_ext_cfg.dts 2017-10-18 15:18:43.123137508 -0700 > +++ fpga_01_a.dts 2017-10-18 15:18:11.587136897 -0700 > @@ -1,12 +1,10 @@ > /dts-v1/; > /plugin/; > -/ { > - fragment@0 { > - target-path = "/soc/base_fpga_region"; > - #address-cells = <1>; > - #size-cells = <1>; > > - __overlay__ { > +// This assumes an existing label in the base dts > +// whose location is "/soc/base_fpga_region" > +&fpga_region { > + > ranges = <0x00000000 0x00000000 0xc0000000 0x00040000>, > <0x00000001 0x00000000 0xff200000 0x00001000>; > > @@ -27,6 +25,4 @@ > interrupt-parent = <&intc>; /* <-- remove to fix build */ > interrupts = <0 21 4>; > }; > - }; > - }; > }; > > > -Frank
On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 07:17:04PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote: > On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 5:34 PM, Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 10/18/17 13:16, Rob Herring wrote: > >> Use devicetree-compiler list for dtc issues please. > >> > >> On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> Hi Rob, Alan, > >>> > >>> On 10/18/17 08:58, Alan Tull wrote: > >>>> Hi Rob, > >>>> > >>>> I've noticed a problem compiling DT overlays and traced it back to > >>>> beginning in next-20171009 > >>>> > >>>> That tag adds the following in scripts/dtc > >>>> > >>>> e9480c1 2017-10-09 16:17:32 +0100 : Mark Brown : Merge remote-tracking > >>>> branch 'devicetree/for-next' > >>>> 4201d05 2017-10-03 15:03:47 -0500 : Rob Herring : scripts/dtc: Update > >>>> to upstream version v1.4.5-3-gb1a60033c110 > >>>> 4322323 2017-10-03 15:03:46 -0500 : Rob Herring : scripts/dtc: add > >>>> fdt_overlay.c and fdt_addresses.c to sync script > >>>> > >>>> The error is: > >>>> > >>>> dtc: /home/atull/repos/linux-socfpga/scripts/dtc/livetree.c:543: > >>>> get_node_by_phandle: Assertion `(phandle != 0) && (phandle != -1)' > >>>> failed. > >>>> arch/arm/boot/dts/socfpga_overlay.dtb: Warning (clocks_property): > >>>> Could not get phandle node for > >>>> /fragment@0/__overlay__/gpio@10040:clocks(cell 0) > >>>> Aborted (core dumped) > >>>> scripts/Makefile.lib:316: recipe for target > >>>> 'arch/arm/boot/dts/socfpga_arria10_socdk_sdmmc_ghrd_ovl_ext_cfg.dtb' > >>>> failed > >>>> make[2]: *** [arch/arm/boot/dts/socfpga_arria10_socdk_sdmmc_ghrd_ovl_ext_cfg.dtb] > >>>> Error 134 > >>>> arch/arm/Makefile:346: recipe for target 'dtbs' failed > >>>> > >>>> Here's a simplified overlay that gets this error. Taking out the line > >>>> "interrupt-parent = <&intc>;" fixes the build. > >>>> > >>>> /dts-v1/; > >>>> /plugin/; > >>>> / { > >>>> fragment@0 { > >>>> target-path = "/soc/base_fpga_region"; > >>>> #address-cells = <1>; > >>>> #size-cells = <1>; > >>>> > >>>> __overlay__ { > >>>> ranges = <0x00000000 0x00000000 0xc0000000 0x00040000>, > >>>> <0x00000001 0x00000000 0xff200000 0x00001000>; > >>>> > >>>> external-fpga-config; > >>>> > >>>> #address-cells = <2>; > >>>> #size-cells = <1>; > >>>> > >>>> fpga_pr_region0 { > >>>> compatible = "fpga-region"; > >>>> fpga-bridges = <&freeze_controller_0>; > >>>> ranges; > >>>> }; > >>>> > >>>> freeze_controller_0: freeze_controller@0x100000450 { > >>>> compatible = "altr,freeze-bridge-controller"; > >>>> reg = <0x00000001 0x00000450 0x00000010>; > >>>> interrupt-parent = <&intc>; /* <-- > >>>> remove to fix build */ > >>>> interrupts = <0 21 4>; > >>>> }; > >>>> }; > >>>> }; > >>>> }; > >>>> > >>>> Alan > >>> > >>> Phandle references in overlays are assigned the value of -1 (0xffffffff) in > >>> the dtb, to be fixed up when loaded. A new check sees this value and > >>> triggers the assert. > >>> > >>> It is this commit in the upstream dtc tools tree: > >>> > >>> commit ee3d26f6960bb5922d9a35fe266d9eac74a78ec0 > >>> checks: add interrupts property check > >>> > >>> There are a bunch of other new checks that call get_node_by_phandle(), > >>> and thus could trigger the assertion. > >>> > >>> I'm guessing that those checks would also trigger the assert if an > >>> overlay contained something that would lead to one of the other checks > >>> being processed. > >> > >> You won't get an assert because I check for 0 or -1 and skip the check > >> in those cases. The interrupts check missed that condition. > > > > Awesome, thank for confirming that. That means the temporary work around > > is quite easy. > > > >> > >> However, as shown above, you will get an erroneous warning because it > >> just skips 1 cell and goes to the next to handle the case where the > >> phandle is optional and you want a fixed number of elements. > > > > Just for those reading along at home, with the one warning disabled, the > > messages become: > > > > $ dtc -Wno-interrupts_property socfpga_arria10_socdk_sdmmc_ghrd_ovl_ext_cfg.dts >junk.dtb > > <stdout>: Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /fragment@0 has a unit name, but no reg property > > <stdout>: Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /fragment@0/__overlay__ has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name > > Look like errors to me. > > >> I guess we can't validate overlays which is unfortunate. I don't think > >> that's a solvable problem unless you have the base DT. > > > > Yes, maybe. But there are still some useful warnings for overlays, maybe. I'm > > not sure what the implications of the "range_format" warning that I will show > > below are (I'd actually have to spend a few minutes thinking about ranges, and > > I don't have the cycles right now). > > Well, yes all the simple localized checks should work, but as we add > more complex checks with either dtc or the schema we'll have after > ELCE next week there's a lot we can't validate. Perhaps we have to > place some restrictions on overlays so we can validate them better. Reworking overlay handling in dtc will help at least insofar as making it easier to work out which checks can be applied to overlay fragments and which only make sense on a fully assembled tree. There will still be plenty of things that can't be checked on overlays, since they absolitely require information from the base tree. This is a reason I really prefer the (alas, stalled) connector proposal, since it makes it much more explicit what the external dependencies of the fragments are. > I do wonder if we could add tags to phandles to make them > identifiable. Perhaps making them all 0xFF?????? instead of starting > at 1. 2^24 phandles should be enough for anyone(TM). True, in a sense. However this is a problem for systems generating FDTs from a real OF. On real OF, the phandles are usually pointers inside OF, and if it happens to allocate it's memory at the top of the address space, phandles in the 0xff?????? range are entirely plausible. 0 and -1 are the only values explicitly disallowed by IEEE1275, so they're the only safe values to use as markers. > That would not > completely solve this problem, but then we could at least find the > phandles in a property. No, it wouldn't do that reliably, because a 0xff?????? value could just as well appear as another integer value in a property.
On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 5:34 PM, Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com> wrote: > On 10/18/17 13:16, Rob Herring wrote: >> Use devicetree-compiler list for dtc issues please. >> >> On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Hi Rob, Alan, >>> >>> On 10/18/17 08:58, Alan Tull wrote: >>>> Hi Rob, >>>> >>>> I've noticed a problem compiling DT overlays and traced it back to >>>> beginning in next-20171009 >>>> >>>> That tag adds the following in scripts/dtc >>>> >>>> e9480c1 2017-10-09 16:17:32 +0100 : Mark Brown : Merge remote-tracking >>>> branch 'devicetree/for-next' >>>> 4201d05 2017-10-03 15:03:47 -0500 : Rob Herring : scripts/dtc: Update >>>> to upstream version v1.4.5-3-gb1a60033c110 >>>> 4322323 2017-10-03 15:03:46 -0500 : Rob Herring : scripts/dtc: add >>>> fdt_overlay.c and fdt_addresses.c to sync script >>>> >>>> The error is: >>>> >>>> dtc: /home/atull/repos/linux-socfpga/scripts/dtc/livetree.c:543: >>>> get_node_by_phandle: Assertion `(phandle != 0) && (phandle != -1)' >>>> failed. >>>> arch/arm/boot/dts/socfpga_overlay.dtb: Warning (clocks_property): >>>> Could not get phandle node for >>>> /fragment@0/__overlay__/gpio@10040:clocks(cell 0) >>>> Aborted (core dumped) >>>> scripts/Makefile.lib:316: recipe for target >>>> 'arch/arm/boot/dts/socfpga_arria10_socdk_sdmmc_ghrd_ovl_ext_cfg.dtb' >>>> failed >>>> make[2]: *** [arch/arm/boot/dts/socfpga_arria10_socdk_sdmmc_ghrd_ovl_ext_cfg.dtb] >>>> Error 134 >>>> arch/arm/Makefile:346: recipe for target 'dtbs' failed >>>> >>>> Here's a simplified overlay that gets this error. Taking out the line >>>> "interrupt-parent = <&intc>;" fixes the build. >>>> >>>> /dts-v1/; >>>> /plugin/; >>>> / { >>>> fragment@0 { >>>> target-path = "/soc/base_fpga_region"; >>>> #address-cells = <1>; >>>> #size-cells = <1>; >>>> >>>> __overlay__ { >>>> ranges = <0x00000000 0x00000000 0xc0000000 0x00040000>, >>>> <0x00000001 0x00000000 0xff200000 0x00001000>; >>>> >>>> external-fpga-config; >>>> >>>> #address-cells = <2>; >>>> #size-cells = <1>; >>>> >>>> fpga_pr_region0 { >>>> compatible = "fpga-region"; >>>> fpga-bridges = <&freeze_controller_0>; >>>> ranges; >>>> }; >>>> >>>> freeze_controller_0: freeze_controller@0x100000450 { >>>> compatible = "altr,freeze-bridge-controller"; >>>> reg = <0x00000001 0x00000450 0x00000010>; >>>> interrupt-parent = <&intc>; /* <-- >>>> remove to fix build */ >>>> interrupts = <0 21 4>; >>>> }; >>>> }; >>>> }; >>>> }; >>>> >>>> Alan >>> >>> Phandle references in overlays are assigned the value of -1 (0xffffffff) in >>> the dtb, to be fixed up when loaded. A new check sees this value and >>> triggers the assert. >>> >>> It is this commit in the upstream dtc tools tree: >>> >>> commit ee3d26f6960bb5922d9a35fe266d9eac74a78ec0 >>> checks: add interrupts property check >>> >>> There are a bunch of other new checks that call get_node_by_phandle(), >>> and thus could trigger the assertion. >>> >>> I'm guessing that those checks would also trigger the assert if an >>> overlay contained something that would lead to one of the other checks >>> being processed. >> >> You won't get an assert because I check for 0 or -1 and skip the check >> in those cases. The interrupts check missed that condition. > > Awesome, thank for confirming that. That means the temporary work around > is quite easy. > >> >> However, as shown above, you will get an erroneous warning because it >> just skips 1 cell and goes to the next to handle the case where the >> phandle is optional and you want a fixed number of elements. > > Just for those reading along at home, with the one warning disabled, the > messages become: > > $ dtc -Wno-interrupts_property socfpga_arria10_socdk_sdmmc_ghrd_ovl_ext_cfg.dts >junk.dtb > <stdout>: Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /fragment@0 has a unit name, but no reg property > <stdout>: Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /fragment@0/__overlay__ has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name > > >> I guess we can't validate overlays which is unfortunate. I don't think >> that's a solvable problem unless you have the base DT. > > Yes, maybe. But there are still some useful warnings for overlays, maybe. I'm > not sure what the implications of the "range_format" warning that I will show > below are (I'd actually have to spend a few minutes thinking about ranges, and > I don't have the cycles right now). > > >> >>> You can avoid the problem in your example dts with "-Wno-interrupts_property" >>> >>> dtc -Wno-interrupts_property fpga_01_a.dts >>> >>> The larger set of other checks that might trigger the assert is too large >>> for me to want to add "-Wno-" flags for all of them to the command line >>> (as temporary workarounds). >> >> David thought more switches were better. > > Yep. Not a complaint, just an observation about a _temporary_ workaround. > > >> >> Rob >> > > > Here is the "range_format" warning I mentioned above. The dts file that > started this thread hand crafts what is internal overlay data, which > should be generated by the dtc compiler instead of being hand coded in > the dts. If I remove the hand coded stuff and let dtc generate the > internal overlay data, the dtc messages become (use a wide window to > avoid line wrapping): > > $ dtc -Wno-interrupts_property fpga_01_a.dts >junk.dtb > <stdout>: Warning (ranges_format): "ranges" property in /fragment@0/__overlay__ has invalid length (32 bytes) (parent #address-cells == 2, child #address-cells == 2, #size-cells == 1) > <stdout>: Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /fragment@0 has a unit name, but no reg property > <stdout>: Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /fragment@0/__overlay__ has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name > <stdout>: Warning (avoid_default_addr_size): Relying on default #address-cells value for /fragment@0/__overlay__ > <stdout>: Warning (avoid_default_addr_size): Relying on default #size-cells value for /fragment@0/__overlay__ > > > The second through last warning are about the format of the internal > data structure, and hopefully could just be suppressed. I don't > know how easy or hard that would be to implement - I am very much > not a dtc internals expert. > > The first warning says something about what the overlay source dts > contains. Here is what the original dts source looks like when > transformed to not contain the hand crafted internal overlay data: > > $ cat fpga_01_a.dts > /dts-v1/; > /plugin/; > > // This assumes an existing label in the base dts > // whose location is "/soc/base_fpga_region" > &fpga_region { > > ranges = <0x00000000 0x00000000 0xc0000000 0x00040000>, > <0x00000001 0x00000000 0xff200000 0x00001000>; > > external-fpga-config; > > #address-cells = <2>; > #size-cells = <1>; > > fpga_pr_region0 { > compatible = "fpga-region"; > fpga-bridges = <&freeze_controller_0>; > ranges; > }; > > freeze_controller_0: freeze_controller@100000450 { > compatible = "altr,freeze-bridge-controller"; > reg = <0x00000001 0x00000450 0x00000010>; > interrupt-parent = <&intc>; /* <-- remove to fix build */ > interrupts = <0 21 4>; > }; > }; > > Of course, if this was a real transformation, I would remove all the > extra tabbing. But the current form makes it easier to see that all > of the stuff that is highly indented is unchanged from the original > dts file. > > $ diff -u socfpga_arria10_socdk_sdmmc_ghrd_ovl_ext_cfg.dts fpga_01_a.dts > --- socfpga_arria10_socdk_sdmmc_ghrd_ovl_ext_cfg.dts 2017-10-18 15:18:43.123137508 -0700 > +++ fpga_01_a.dts 2017-10-18 15:18:11.587136897 -0700 > @@ -1,12 +1,10 @@ > /dts-v1/; > /plugin/; > -/ { > - fragment@0 { > - target-path = "/soc/base_fpga_region"; > - #address-cells = <1>; > - #size-cells = <1>; > > - __overlay__ { > +// This assumes an existing label in the base dts > +// whose location is "/soc/base_fpga_region" > +&fpga_region { > + Frank, Thanks for correcting me on this. I have this documented wrong in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/fpga/fpga-region.txt so I'll need to fix that to not steer people wrong. Alan > ranges = <0x00000000 0x00000000 0xc0000000 0x00040000>, > <0x00000001 0x00000000 0xff200000 0x00001000>; > > @@ -27,6 +25,4 @@ > interrupt-parent = <&intc>; /* <-- remove to fix build */ > interrupts = <0 21 4>; > }; > - }; > - }; > }; > > > -Frank -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fpga" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 10/19/17 07:29, Alan Tull wrote: > On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 5:34 PM, Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 10/18/17 13:16, Rob Herring wrote: >>> Use devicetree-compiler list for dtc issues please. >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> Hi Rob, Alan, >>>> >>>> On 10/18/17 08:58, Alan Tull wrote: >>>>> Hi Rob, >>>>> >>>>> I've noticed a problem compiling DT overlays and traced it back to >>>>> beginning in next-20171009 >>>>> >>>>> That tag adds the following in scripts/dtc >>>>> >>>>> e9480c1 2017-10-09 16:17:32 +0100 : Mark Brown : Merge remote-tracking >>>>> branch 'devicetree/for-next' >>>>> 4201d05 2017-10-03 15:03:47 -0500 : Rob Herring : scripts/dtc: Update >>>>> to upstream version v1.4.5-3-gb1a60033c110 >>>>> 4322323 2017-10-03 15:03:46 -0500 : Rob Herring : scripts/dtc: add >>>>> fdt_overlay.c and fdt_addresses.c to sync script >>>>> >>>>> The error is: >>>>> >>>>> dtc: /home/atull/repos/linux-socfpga/scripts/dtc/livetree.c:543: >>>>> get_node_by_phandle: Assertion `(phandle != 0) && (phandle != -1)' >>>>> failed. >>>>> arch/arm/boot/dts/socfpga_overlay.dtb: Warning (clocks_property): >>>>> Could not get phandle node for >>>>> /fragment@0/__overlay__/gpio@10040:clocks(cell 0) >>>>> Aborted (core dumped) >>>>> scripts/Makefile.lib:316: recipe for target >>>>> 'arch/arm/boot/dts/socfpga_arria10_socdk_sdmmc_ghrd_ovl_ext_cfg.dtb' >>>>> failed >>>>> make[2]: *** [arch/arm/boot/dts/socfpga_arria10_socdk_sdmmc_ghrd_ovl_ext_cfg.dtb] >>>>> Error 134 >>>>> arch/arm/Makefile:346: recipe for target 'dtbs' failed >>>>> >>>>> Here's a simplified overlay that gets this error. Taking out the line >>>>> "interrupt-parent = <&intc>;" fixes the build. >>>>> >>>>> /dts-v1/; >>>>> /plugin/; >>>>> / { >>>>> fragment@0 { >>>>> target-path = "/soc/base_fpga_region"; >>>>> #address-cells = <1>; >>>>> #size-cells = <1>; >>>>> >>>>> __overlay__ { >>>>> ranges = <0x00000000 0x00000000 0xc0000000 0x00040000>, >>>>> <0x00000001 0x00000000 0xff200000 0x00001000>; >>>>> >>>>> external-fpga-config; >>>>> >>>>> #address-cells = <2>; >>>>> #size-cells = <1>; >>>>> >>>>> fpga_pr_region0 { >>>>> compatible = "fpga-region"; >>>>> fpga-bridges = <&freeze_controller_0>; >>>>> ranges; >>>>> }; >>>>> >>>>> freeze_controller_0: freeze_controller@0x100000450 { >>>>> compatible = "altr,freeze-bridge-controller"; >>>>> reg = <0x00000001 0x00000450 0x00000010>; >>>>> interrupt-parent = <&intc>; /* <-- >>>>> remove to fix build */ >>>>> interrupts = <0 21 4>; >>>>> }; >>>>> }; >>>>> }; >>>>> }; >>>>> >>>>> Alan >>>> >>>> Phandle references in overlays are assigned the value of -1 (0xffffffff) in >>>> the dtb, to be fixed up when loaded. A new check sees this value and >>>> triggers the assert. >>>> >>>> It is this commit in the upstream dtc tools tree: >>>> >>>> commit ee3d26f6960bb5922d9a35fe266d9eac74a78ec0 >>>> checks: add interrupts property check >>>> >>>> There are a bunch of other new checks that call get_node_by_phandle(), >>>> and thus could trigger the assertion. >>>> >>>> I'm guessing that those checks would also trigger the assert if an >>>> overlay contained something that would lead to one of the other checks >>>> being processed. >>> >>> You won't get an assert because I check for 0 or -1 and skip the check >>> in those cases. The interrupts check missed that condition. >> >> Awesome, thank for confirming that. That means the temporary work around >> is quite easy. >> >>> >>> However, as shown above, you will get an erroneous warning because it >>> just skips 1 cell and goes to the next to handle the case where the >>> phandle is optional and you want a fixed number of elements. >> >> Just for those reading along at home, with the one warning disabled, the >> messages become: >> >> $ dtc -Wno-interrupts_property socfpga_arria10_socdk_sdmmc_ghrd_ovl_ext_cfg.dts >junk.dtb >> <stdout>: Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /fragment@0 has a unit name, but no reg property >> <stdout>: Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /fragment@0/__overlay__ has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name >> >> >>> I guess we can't validate overlays which is unfortunate. I don't think >>> that's a solvable problem unless you have the base DT. >> >> Yes, maybe. But there are still some useful warnings for overlays, maybe. I'm >> not sure what the implications of the "range_format" warning that I will show >> below are (I'd actually have to spend a few minutes thinking about ranges, and >> I don't have the cycles right now). >> >> >>> >>>> You can avoid the problem in your example dts with "-Wno-interrupts_property" >>>> >>>> dtc -Wno-interrupts_property fpga_01_a.dts >>>> >>>> The larger set of other checks that might trigger the assert is too large >>>> for me to want to add "-Wno-" flags for all of them to the command line >>>> (as temporary workarounds). >>> >>> David thought more switches were better. >> >> Yep. Not a complaint, just an observation about a _temporary_ workaround. >> >> >>> >>> Rob >>> >> >> >> Here is the "range_format" warning I mentioned above. The dts file that >> started this thread hand crafts what is internal overlay data, which >> should be generated by the dtc compiler instead of being hand coded in >> the dts. If I remove the hand coded stuff and let dtc generate the >> internal overlay data, the dtc messages become (use a wide window to >> avoid line wrapping): >> >> $ dtc -Wno-interrupts_property fpga_01_a.dts >junk.dtb >> <stdout>: Warning (ranges_format): "ranges" property in /fragment@0/__overlay__ has invalid length (32 bytes) (parent #address-cells == 2, child #address-cells == 2, #size-cells == 1) >> <stdout>: Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /fragment@0 has a unit name, but no reg property >> <stdout>: Warning (unit_address_vs_reg): Node /fragment@0/__overlay__ has a reg or ranges property, but no unit name >> <stdout>: Warning (avoid_default_addr_size): Relying on default #address-cells value for /fragment@0/__overlay__ >> <stdout>: Warning (avoid_default_addr_size): Relying on default #size-cells value for /fragment@0/__overlay__ >> >> >> The second through last warning are about the format of the internal >> data structure, and hopefully could just be suppressed. I don't >> know how easy or hard that would be to implement - I am very much >> not a dtc internals expert. >> >> The first warning says something about what the overlay source dts >> contains. Here is what the original dts source looks like when >> transformed to not contain the hand crafted internal overlay data: >> >> $ cat fpga_01_a.dts >> /dts-v1/; >> /plugin/; >> >> // This assumes an existing label in the base dts >> // whose location is "/soc/base_fpga_region" >> &fpga_region { >> >> ranges = <0x00000000 0x00000000 0xc0000000 0x00040000>, >> <0x00000001 0x00000000 0xff200000 0x00001000>; >> >> external-fpga-config; >> >> #address-cells = <2>; >> #size-cells = <1>; >> >> fpga_pr_region0 { >> compatible = "fpga-region"; >> fpga-bridges = <&freeze_controller_0>; >> ranges; >> }; >> >> freeze_controller_0: freeze_controller@100000450 { >> compatible = "altr,freeze-bridge-controller"; >> reg = <0x00000001 0x00000450 0x00000010>; >> interrupt-parent = <&intc>; /* <-- remove to fix build */ >> interrupts = <0 21 4>; >> }; >> }; >> >> Of course, if this was a real transformation, I would remove all the >> extra tabbing. But the current form makes it easier to see that all >> of the stuff that is highly indented is unchanged from the original >> dts file. >> >> $ diff -u socfpga_arria10_socdk_sdmmc_ghrd_ovl_ext_cfg.dts fpga_01_a.dts >> --- socfpga_arria10_socdk_sdmmc_ghrd_ovl_ext_cfg.dts 2017-10-18 15:18:43.123137508 -0700 >> +++ fpga_01_a.dts 2017-10-18 15:18:11.587136897 -0700 >> @@ -1,12 +1,10 @@ >> /dts-v1/; >> /plugin/; >> -/ { >> - fragment@0 { >> - target-path = "/soc/base_fpga_region"; >> - #address-cells = <1>; >> - #size-cells = <1>; >> >> - __overlay__ { >> +// This assumes an existing label in the base dts >> +// whose location is "/soc/base_fpga_region" >> +&fpga_region { >> + > > Frank, > > Thanks for correcting me on this. I have this documented wrong in > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/fpga/fpga-region.txt > so I'll need to fix that to not steer people wrong. Thanks for pointing that out. The new devicetree source format won't be available until the new dtc that is in Rob's next branch hits mainline. -Frank > Alan > > >> ranges = <0x00000000 0x00000000 0xc0000000 0x00040000>, >> <0x00000001 0x00000000 0xff200000 0x00001000>; >> >> @@ -27,6 +25,4 @@ >> interrupt-parent = <&intc>; /* <-- remove to fix build */ >> interrupts = <0 21 4>; >> }; >> - }; >> - }; >> }; >> >> >> -Frank > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fpga" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--- socfpga_arria10_socdk_sdmmc_ghrd_ovl_ext_cfg.dts 2017-10-18 15:18:43.123137508 -0700 +++ fpga_01_a.dts 2017-10-18 15:18:11.587136897 -0700 @@ -1,12 +1,10 @@ /dts-v1/; /plugin/; -/ { - fragment@0 { - target-path = "/soc/base_fpga_region"; - #address-cells = <1>; - #size-cells = <1>; - __overlay__ { +// This assumes an existing label in the base dts +// whose location is "/soc/base_fpga_region" +&fpga_region { + ranges = <0x00000000 0x00000000 0xc0000000 0x00040000>, <0x00000001 0x00000000 0xff200000 0x00001000>; @@ -27,6 +25,4 @@ interrupt-parent = <&intc>; /* <-- remove to fix build */ interrupts = <0 21 4>; }; - }; - }; };