[PATCH 1/2] of: base: add helper to rename a node

[PATCH 1/2] of: base: add helper to rename a node

[Marco Felsch]

Sometimes it can be necessary to rename a node, e.g. to override/create
a node which gets renamed upstream.

Signed-off-by: Marco Felsch <m.felsch@pengutronix.de>
---
 drivers/of/base.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
 include/of.h      |  5 +++++
 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/of/base.c b/drivers/of/base.c
index b082f0c656..6644d9b96a 100644
--- a/drivers/of/base.c
+++ b/drivers/of/base.c
@@ -2094,6 +2094,24 @@ void of_delete_node(struct device_node *node)
 		of_set_root_node(NULL);
 }
 
+void of_rename_node(struct device_node *node, char *name)
+{
+	struct device_node *parent;
+
+	if (!node)
+		return;
+
+	parent = node->parent;
+	if (parent) {
+		node->name = name;
+		node->full_name = basprintf("%s/%s", parent->full_name, name);
+	} else {
+		/* root node */
+		node->name = xstrdup("");
+		node->full_name = xstrdup("");
+	}
+}
+
 int of_device_is_stdout_path(struct device_d *dev)
 {
 	struct device_node *dn;
diff --git a/include/of.h b/include/of.h
index 184acb4741..403f399d95 100644
--- a/include/of.h
+++ b/include/of.h
@@ -158,6 +158,7 @@ extern struct device_node *of_create_node(struct device_node *root,
 extern struct device_node *of_copy_node(struct device_node *parent,
 				const struct device_node *other);
 extern void of_delete_node(struct device_node *node);
+extern void of_rename_node(struct device_node *node, char *name);
 
 extern const char *of_get_machine_compatible(void);
 extern int of_machine_is_compatible(const char *compat);
@@ -605,6 +606,10 @@ static inline void of_delete_node(struct device_node *node)
 {
 }
 
+static inline void of_rename_node(struct device_node *node, char *name)
+{
+}
+
 static inline int of_machine_is_compatible(const char *compat)
 {
 	return 0;
-- 
2.20.1


_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox

[PATCH 2/2] memory: of_fixup: adapt to new memory layout

[Marco Felsch]

Since kernel 4.16 the memory nodes got a @<reg> suffix so the fixup
won't work correctly anymore, because instead of adapting the extisting
one it creates a new node.

To be compatible with the old and new layout delete the found memory
node and create a new one. The new node follows the new @<reg> style.

The patch also renames the node element to root to make it more clear.

Signed-off-by: Marco Felsch <m.felsch@pengutronix.de>
---
 common/memory.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++--
 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/common/memory.c b/common/memory.c
index 00fa7c50ff..5402acab8e 100644
--- a/common/memory.c
+++ b/common/memory.c
@@ -224,7 +224,7 @@ int memory_bank_first_find_space(resource_size_t *retstart,
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_OFTREE
 
-static int of_memory_fixup(struct device_node *node, void *unused)
+static int of_memory_fixup(struct device_node *root, void *unused)
 {
 	struct memory_bank *bank;
 	int err;
@@ -232,7 +232,23 @@ static int of_memory_fixup(struct device_node *node, void *unused)
 	struct device_node *memnode;
 	u8 tmp[16 * 16]; /* Up to 64-bit address + 64-bit size */
 
-	memnode = of_create_node(node, "/memory");
+	/*
+	 * Since kernel 4.16 the memory node got a @<reg> suffix. To support
+	 * the old and the new style delete any found memory node and add it
+	 * again to be sure that the memory node exists only once. It shouldn't
+	 * bother older kernels if the memory node has this suffix so adding it
+	 * following the new style.
+	 */
+
+	memnode = of_find_node_by_name(root, "memory");
+	if (!memnode)
+		memnode = of_find_node_by_type(root, "memory");
+
+	if (memnode)
+		of_delete_node(memnode);
+
+	/* At this moment we don't know the <reg> val */
+	memnode = of_create_node(root, "/memory");
 	if (!memnode)
 		return -ENOMEM;
 
@@ -256,6 +272,10 @@ static int of_memory_fixup(struct device_node *node, void *unused)
 		return err;
 	}
 
+	/* now adapt the node name */
+	of_rename_node(memnode, basprintf("memory@%llx",
+				 of_read_number((u32 *)tmp, addr_cell_len)));
+
 	return 0;
 }
 
-- 
2.20.1


_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox

Re: [PATCH 1/2] of: base: add helper to rename a node

[Sascha Hauer]

Hi Marco,

On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 05:20:12PM +0100, Marco Felsch wrote:
> Sometimes it can be necessary to rename a node, e.g. to override/create
> a node which gets renamed upstream.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Marco Felsch <m.felsch@pengutronix.de>
> ---
>  drivers/of/base.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
>  include/of.h      |  5 +++++
>  2 files changed, 23 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/of/base.c b/drivers/of/base.c
> index b082f0c656..6644d9b96a 100644
> --- a/drivers/of/base.c
> +++ b/drivers/of/base.c
> @@ -2094,6 +2094,24 @@ void of_delete_node(struct device_node *node)
>  		of_set_root_node(NULL);
>  }
>  
> +void of_rename_node(struct device_node *node, char *name)

Should be const char * name.

> +{
> +	struct device_node *parent;
> +
> +	if (!node)
> +		return;
> +
> +	parent = node->parent;
> +	if (parent) {
> +		node->name = name;

node->name is an allocated string. It should be freed and then set to an
allocated string again.

> +		node->full_name = basprintf("%s/%s", parent->full_name, name);
> +	} else {
> +		/* root node */
> +		node->name = xstrdup("");
> +		node->full_name = xstrdup("");

I think we can drop the else path entirely. If we do not allow to give
the root node a name then we can assume that it doesn't have a name
right now, so nothing to do here.

Sascha

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |

_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox

Re: [PATCH 2/2] memory: of_fixup: adapt to new memory layout

[Sascha Hauer]

On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 05:20:13PM +0100, Marco Felsch wrote:
> Since kernel 4.16 the memory nodes got a @<reg> suffix so the fixup
> won't work correctly anymore, because instead of adapting the extisting
> one it creates a new node.
> 
> To be compatible with the old and new layout delete the found memory
> node and create a new one. The new node follows the new @<reg> style.
> 
> The patch also renames the node element to root to make it more clear.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Marco Felsch <m.felsch@pengutronix.de>
> ---
>  common/memory.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/common/memory.c b/common/memory.c
> index 00fa7c50ff..5402acab8e 100644
> --- a/common/memory.c
> +++ b/common/memory.c
> @@ -224,7 +224,7 @@ int memory_bank_first_find_space(resource_size_t *retstart,
>  
>  #ifdef CONFIG_OFTREE
>  
> -static int of_memory_fixup(struct device_node *node, void *unused)
> +static int of_memory_fixup(struct device_node *root, void *unused)
>  {
>  	struct memory_bank *bank;
>  	int err;
> @@ -232,7 +232,23 @@ static int of_memory_fixup(struct device_node *node, void *unused)
>  	struct device_node *memnode;
>  	u8 tmp[16 * 16]; /* Up to 64-bit address + 64-bit size */
>  
> -	memnode = of_create_node(node, "/memory");
> +	/*
> +	 * Since kernel 4.16 the memory node got a @<reg> suffix. To support
> +	 * the old and the new style delete any found memory node and add it
> +	 * again to be sure that the memory node exists only once. It shouldn't
> +	 * bother older kernels if the memory node has this suffix so adding it
> +	 * following the new style.
> +	 */
> +
> +	memnode = of_find_node_by_name(root, "memory");

We don't need this as the /memory node must have device_type = memory.

> +	if (!memnode)
> +		memnode = of_find_node_by_type(root, "memory");

You shouldn't assume that there's only one /memory node. There can be
multiple.
The /memory node must be a direct child of the root node, so it's
unnecessary to traverse the whole tree using of_find_node_by_type().
Something like for_each_child_of_node_safe(root, tmp, np) fits better.


> +
> +	if (memnode)
> +		of_delete_node(memnode);
> +
> +	/* At this moment we don't know the <reg> val */
> +	memnode = of_create_node(root, "/memory");
>  	if (!memnode)
>  		return -ENOMEM;
>  
> @@ -256,6 +272,10 @@ static int of_memory_fixup(struct device_node *node, void *unused)
>  		return err;
>  	}
>  
> +	/* now adapt the node name */
> +	of_rename_node(memnode, basprintf("memory@%llx",
> +				 of_read_number((u32 *)tmp, addr_cell_len)));

It's also allowed to create one /memory node per memory bank. Maybe
that's more straightforward to implement.

Sascha

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |

_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox

Re: [PATCH 2/2] memory: of_fixup: adapt to new memory layout

[Marco Felsch]

Hi Sascha,

On 19-02-12 09:03, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 05:20:13PM +0100, Marco Felsch wrote:
> > Since kernel 4.16 the memory nodes got a @<reg> suffix so the fixup
> > won't work correctly anymore, because instead of adapting the extisting
> > one it creates a new node.
> > 
> > To be compatible with the old and new layout delete the found memory
> > node and create a new one. The new node follows the new @<reg> style.
> > 
> > The patch also renames the node element to root to make it more clear.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Marco Felsch <m.felsch@pengutronix.de>
> > ---
> >  common/memory.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++--
> >  1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/common/memory.c b/common/memory.c
> > index 00fa7c50ff..5402acab8e 100644
> > --- a/common/memory.c
> > +++ b/common/memory.c
> > @@ -224,7 +224,7 @@ int memory_bank_first_find_space(resource_size_t *retstart,
> >  
> >  #ifdef CONFIG_OFTREE
> >  
> > -static int of_memory_fixup(struct device_node *node, void *unused)
> > +static int of_memory_fixup(struct device_node *root, void *unused)
> >  {
> >  	struct memory_bank *bank;
> >  	int err;
> > @@ -232,7 +232,23 @@ static int of_memory_fixup(struct device_node *node, void *unused)
> >  	struct device_node *memnode;
> >  	u8 tmp[16 * 16]; /* Up to 64-bit address + 64-bit size */
> >  
> > -	memnode = of_create_node(node, "/memory");
> > +	/*
> > +	 * Since kernel 4.16 the memory node got a @<reg> suffix. To support
> > +	 * the old and the new style delete any found memory node and add it
> > +	 * again to be sure that the memory node exists only once. It shouldn't
> > +	 * bother older kernels if the memory node has this suffix so adding it
> > +	 * following the new style.
> > +	 */
> > +
> > +	memnode = of_find_node_by_name(root, "memory");
> 
> We don't need this as the /memory node must have device_type = memory.

Okay, tought about the old devicetrees where the QA wasn't that good. I
will drop this.

> 
> > +	if (!memnode)
> > +		memnode = of_find_node_by_type(root, "memory");
> 
> You shouldn't assume that there's only one /memory node. There can be
> multiple.

Sure.. damn, checked only a few devicetree's where multiple banks are
mapped to the reg property. I will change this.

> The /memory node must be a direct child of the root node, so it's
> unnecessary to traverse the whole tree using of_find_node_by_type().
> Something like for_each_child_of_node_safe(root, tmp, np) fits better.

Okay.

> 
> > +
> > +	if (memnode)
> > +		of_delete_node(memnode);
> > +
> > +	/* At this moment we don't know the <reg> val */
> > +	memnode = of_create_node(root, "/memory");
> >  	if (!memnode)
> >  		return -ENOMEM;
> >  
> > @@ -256,6 +272,10 @@ static int of_memory_fixup(struct device_node *node, void *unused)
> >  		return err;
> >  	}
> >  
> > +	/* now adapt the node name */
> > +	of_rename_node(memnode, basprintf("memory@%llx",
> > +				 of_read_number((u32 *)tmp, addr_cell_len)));
> 
> It's also allowed to create one /memory node per memory bank. Maybe
> that's more straightforward to implement.

Is it wrong to adapt the name later? As specified by DT-Spec [1], the
@<reg> should be set to the first address.

[1]
https://github.com/devicetree-org/devicetree-specification/releases/tag/v0.2,
Chapter 2.2.1

Regards,
Marco

> 
> Sascha
> 
> -- 
> Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
> Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
> Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
> Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |
> 

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |

_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox

Re: [PATCH 1/2] of: base: add helper to rename a node

[Marco Felsch]

Hi Sascha,

On 19-02-12 08:32, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> Hi Marco,
> 
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 05:20:12PM +0100, Marco Felsch wrote:
> > Sometimes it can be necessary to rename a node, e.g. to override/create
> > a node which gets renamed upstream.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Marco Felsch <m.felsch@pengutronix.de>
> > ---
> >  drivers/of/base.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
> >  include/of.h      |  5 +++++
> >  2 files changed, 23 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/of/base.c b/drivers/of/base.c
> > index b082f0c656..6644d9b96a 100644
> > --- a/drivers/of/base.c
> > +++ b/drivers/of/base.c
> > @@ -2094,6 +2094,24 @@ void of_delete_node(struct device_node *node)
> >  		of_set_root_node(NULL);
> >  }
> >  
> > +void of_rename_node(struct device_node *node, char *name)
> 
> Should be const char * name.

Okay.

> 
> > +{
> > +	struct device_node *parent;
> > +
> > +	if (!node)
> > +		return;
> > +
> > +	parent = node->parent;
> > +	if (parent) {
> > +		node->name = name;
> 
> node->name is an allocated string. It should be freed and then set to an
> allocated string again.

Okay, I will do this.

> 
> > +		node->full_name = basprintf("%s/%s", parent->full_name, name);
> > +	} else {
> > +		/* root node */
> > +		node->name = xstrdup("");
> > +		node->full_name = xstrdup("");
> 
> I think we can drop the else path entirely. If we do not allow to give
> the root node a name then we can assume that it doesn't have a name
> right now, so nothing to do here.

Sure, I will change this.

Regards,
Marco

> Sascha
> 
> -- 
> Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
> Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
> Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
> Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |
> 

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |

_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox

Re: [PATCH 2/2] memory: of_fixup: adapt to new memory layout

[Sascha Hauer]

On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 09:45:25AM +0100, Marco Felsch wrote:
> Hi Sascha,
> 
> On 19-02-12 09:03, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 05:20:13PM +0100, Marco Felsch wrote:
> > > Since kernel 4.16 the memory nodes got a @<reg> suffix so the fixup
> > > won't work correctly anymore, because instead of adapting the extisting
> > > one it creates a new node.
> > > 
> > > To be compatible with the old and new layout delete the found memory
> > > node and create a new one. The new node follows the new @<reg> style.
> > > 
> > > The patch also renames the node element to root to make it more clear.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Marco Felsch <m.felsch@pengutronix.de>
> > > ---
> > >  common/memory.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++--
> > >  1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/common/memory.c b/common/memory.c
> > > index 00fa7c50ff..5402acab8e 100644
> > > --- a/common/memory.c
> > > +++ b/common/memory.c
> > > @@ -224,7 +224,7 @@ int memory_bank_first_find_space(resource_size_t *retstart,
> > >  
> > >  #ifdef CONFIG_OFTREE
> > >  
> > > -static int of_memory_fixup(struct device_node *node, void *unused)
> > > +static int of_memory_fixup(struct device_node *root, void *unused)
> > >  {
> > >  	struct memory_bank *bank;
> > >  	int err;
> > > @@ -232,7 +232,23 @@ static int of_memory_fixup(struct device_node *node, void *unused)
> > >  	struct device_node *memnode;
> > >  	u8 tmp[16 * 16]; /* Up to 64-bit address + 64-bit size */
> > >  
> > > -	memnode = of_create_node(node, "/memory");
> > > +	/*
> > > +	 * Since kernel 4.16 the memory node got a @<reg> suffix. To support
> > > +	 * the old and the new style delete any found memory node and add it
> > > +	 * again to be sure that the memory node exists only once. It shouldn't
> > > +	 * bother older kernels if the memory node has this suffix so adding it
> > > +	 * following the new style.
> > > +	 */
> > > +
> > > +	memnode = of_find_node_by_name(root, "memory");
> > 
> > We don't need this as the /memory node must have device_type = memory.
> 
> Okay, tought about the old devicetrees where the QA wasn't that good. I
> will drop this.
> 
> > 
> > > +	if (!memnode)
> > > +		memnode = of_find_node_by_type(root, "memory");
> > 
> > You shouldn't assume that there's only one /memory node. There can be
> > multiple.
> 
> Sure.. damn, checked only a few devicetree's where multiple banks are
> mapped to the reg property. I will change this.
> 
> > The /memory node must be a direct child of the root node, so it's
> > unnecessary to traverse the whole tree using of_find_node_by_type().
> > Something like for_each_child_of_node_safe(root, tmp, np) fits better.
> 
> Okay.
> 
> > 
> > > +
> > > +	if (memnode)
> > > +		of_delete_node(memnode);
> > > +
> > > +	/* At this moment we don't know the <reg> val */
> > > +	memnode = of_create_node(root, "/memory");
> > >  	if (!memnode)
> > >  		return -ENOMEM;
> > >  
> > > @@ -256,6 +272,10 @@ static int of_memory_fixup(struct device_node *node, void *unused)
> > >  		return err;
> > >  	}
> > >  
> > > +	/* now adapt the node name */
> > > +	of_rename_node(memnode, basprintf("memory@%llx",
> > > +				 of_read_number((u32 *)tmp, addr_cell_len)));
> > 
> > It's also allowed to create one /memory node per memory bank. Maybe
> > that's more straightforward to implement.
> 
> Is it wrong to adapt the name later? As specified by DT-Spec [1], the
> @<reg> should be set to the first address.

What do they mean with the first address? Currently the memory banks in
barebox are not sorted, so you are setting @reg indeed to the first
address, but this is not currently necessarily the lowest one.

Sascha

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |

_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox

Re: [PATCH 2/2] memory: of_fixup: adapt to new memory layout

[Marco Felsch]

On 19-02-12 09:56, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 09:45:25AM +0100, Marco Felsch wrote:
> > Hi Sascha,
> > 
> > On 19-02-12 09:03, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 05:20:13PM +0100, Marco Felsch wrote:
> > > > Since kernel 4.16 the memory nodes got a @<reg> suffix so the fixup
> > > > won't work correctly anymore, because instead of adapting the extisting
> > > > one it creates a new node.
> > > > 
> > > > To be compatible with the old and new layout delete the found memory
> > > > node and create a new one. The new node follows the new @<reg> style.
> > > > 
> > > > The patch also renames the node element to root to make it more clear.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Marco Felsch <m.felsch@pengutronix.de>
> > > > ---
> > > >  common/memory.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++--
> > > >  1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/common/memory.c b/common/memory.c
> > > > index 00fa7c50ff..5402acab8e 100644
> > > > --- a/common/memory.c
> > > > +++ b/common/memory.c
> > > > @@ -224,7 +224,7 @@ int memory_bank_first_find_space(resource_size_t *retstart,
> > > >  
> > > >  #ifdef CONFIG_OFTREE
> > > >  
> > > > -static int of_memory_fixup(struct device_node *node, void *unused)
> > > > +static int of_memory_fixup(struct device_node *root, void *unused)
> > > >  {
> > > >  	struct memory_bank *bank;
> > > >  	int err;
> > > > @@ -232,7 +232,23 @@ static int of_memory_fixup(struct device_node *node, void *unused)
> > > >  	struct device_node *memnode;
> > > >  	u8 tmp[16 * 16]; /* Up to 64-bit address + 64-bit size */
> > > >  
> > > > -	memnode = of_create_node(node, "/memory");
> > > > +	/*
> > > > +	 * Since kernel 4.16 the memory node got a @<reg> suffix. To support
> > > > +	 * the old and the new style delete any found memory node and add it
> > > > +	 * again to be sure that the memory node exists only once. It shouldn't
> > > > +	 * bother older kernels if the memory node has this suffix so adding it
> > > > +	 * following the new style.
> > > > +	 */
> > > > +
> > > > +	memnode = of_find_node_by_name(root, "memory");
> > > 
> > > We don't need this as the /memory node must have device_type = memory.
> > 
> > Okay, tought about the old devicetrees where the QA wasn't that good. I
> > will drop this.
> > 
> > > 
> > > > +	if (!memnode)
> > > > +		memnode = of_find_node_by_type(root, "memory");
> > > 
> > > You shouldn't assume that there's only one /memory node. There can be
> > > multiple.
> > 
> > Sure.. damn, checked only a few devicetree's where multiple banks are
> > mapped to the reg property. I will change this.
> > 
> > > The /memory node must be a direct child of the root node, so it's
> > > unnecessary to traverse the whole tree using of_find_node_by_type().
> > > Something like for_each_child_of_node_safe(root, tmp, np) fits better.
> > 
> > Okay.
> > 
> > > 
> > > > +
> > > > +	if (memnode)
> > > > +		of_delete_node(memnode);
> > > > +
> > > > +	/* At this moment we don't know the <reg> val */
> > > > +	memnode = of_create_node(root, "/memory");
> > > >  	if (!memnode)
> > > >  		return -ENOMEM;
> > > >  
> > > > @@ -256,6 +272,10 @@ static int of_memory_fixup(struct device_node *node, void *unused)
> > > >  		return err;
> > > >  	}
> > > >  
> > > > +	/* now adapt the node name */
> > > > +	of_rename_node(memnode, basprintf("memory@%llx",
> > > > +				 of_read_number((u32 *)tmp, addr_cell_len)));
> > > 
> > > It's also allowed to create one /memory node per memory bank. Maybe
> > > that's more straightforward to implement.
> > 
> > Is it wrong to adapt the name later? As specified by DT-Spec [1], the
> > @<reg> should be set to the first address.
> 
> What do they mean with the first address? Currently the memory banks in
> barebox are not sorted, so you are setting @reg indeed to the first
> address, but this is not currently necessarily the lowest one.

By first I mean the lowest, sorry. Oh I tought the banks are sorted, now
I got you. In that case it is easier to add one /memory node per memory
bank, as you mentoined. I will change that in my v2.

Regards,
Marco

> 
> Sascha
> 

_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox