Subject: [PATCHv4 2/3] ARM: msm: Add support for APQ8074 Dragonboard

From: [email-masked] (David Brown)
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 13:58:08 -0700

On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 02:33:53PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:

>> "ePAPR 1.1 section 2.2.1.1 "Node Name Requirements" specifies that any
>> node that has a reg property must include a unit address in its name
>> with value matching the first entry in its reg property. Conversely, if
>> a node does not have a reg property, the node name must not include a
>> unit address."
>>
>> The soc node we have does not have a reg property ?
>
>Not 100% sure what people will decide on this.  There are a number of
>examples on the PPC side (arch/powerpc/boot/dts) that are soc at ADDR,
>but they don't typically have "reg" properties at the soc level.
>
>Let's go ahead w/o the unit address (as you have it) for now.

What is the address even supposed to mean?  Are we expecting multiple
'soc' nodes?

David