| Message ID | 20210819154436.117798-3-krzysztof.kozlowski@canonical.com |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Commit | 80a9609c93ef4601a4c640d4df079c05287186f9 |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [1/6] dt-bindings: riscv: correct e51 and u54-mc CPU bindings | expand |
Hi Krzysztof, On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 6:22 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@canonical.com> wrote: > On 19/08/2021 17:44, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > The DTSI file defines soc node and address/size cells, so there is no > > point in duplicating it in DTS file. > > > > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@canonical.com> > > --- > > arch/riscv/boot/dts/microchip/microchip-mpfs-icicle-kit.dts | 5 ----- > > 1 file changed, 5 deletions(-) > > > > Now I wonder whether the subject prefix should be "riscv: dts: > microchip:" instead? Agreed. For the actual patch contents: Reviewed-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert
diff --git a/arch/riscv/boot/dts/microchip/microchip-mpfs-icicle-kit.dts b/arch/riscv/boot/dts/microchip/microchip-mpfs-icicle-kit.dts index ec79944065c9..237830583514 100644 --- a/arch/riscv/boot/dts/microchip/microchip-mpfs-icicle-kit.dts +++ b/arch/riscv/boot/dts/microchip/microchip-mpfs-icicle-kit.dts @@ -9,8 +9,6 @@ #define RTCCLK_FREQ 1000000 / { - #address-cells = <2>; - #size-cells = <2>; model = "Microchip PolarFire-SoC Icicle Kit"; compatible = "microchip,mpfs-icicle-kit"; @@ -27,9 +25,6 @@ memory@80000000 { reg = <0x0 0x80000000 0x0 0x40000000>; clocks = <&clkcfg 26>; }; - - soc { - }; }; &serial0 {
The DTSI file defines soc node and address/size cells, so there is no point in duplicating it in DTS file. Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@canonical.com> --- arch/riscv/boot/dts/microchip/microchip-mpfs-icicle-kit.dts | 5 ----- 1 file changed, 5 deletions(-)