[PATCH] arm64: dts: qcom: sm8650-hdk: Fix compile warnings in typec-mux node

[PATCH] arm64: dts: qcom: sm8650-hdk: Fix compile warnings in typec-mux node

[Krishna Kurapati]

With W=1, the following error comes up:

Warning (graph_child_address): /soc@0/geniqup@ac0000/i2c@a8c000/typec-mux@e/ports: graph node has single child node 'port@0', #address-cells/#size-cells are not necessary

Fix this up by adding only one port node.

Fixes: 01061441029e7 ("arm64: dts: qcom: sm8650: add support for the SM8650-HDK board")
Signed-off-by: Krishna Kurapati <krishna.kurapati@oss.qualcomm.com>
---
This patch has only been compile tested.

 arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8650-hdk.dts | 13 +++----------
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8650-hdk.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8650-hdk.dts
index 5bf1af3308ce..46700ec9ac9b 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8650-hdk.dts
+++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8650-hdk.dts
@@ -831,16 +831,9 @@ wcd_usbss: typec-mux@e {
 		mode-switch;
 		orientation-switch;
 
-		ports {
-			#address-cells = <1>;
-			#size-cells = <0>;
-
-			port@0 {
-				reg = <0>;
-
-				wcd_usbss_sbu_mux: endpoint {
-					remote-endpoint = <&pmic_glink_sbu>;
-				};
+		port {
+			wcd_usbss_sbu_mux: endpoint {
+				remote-endpoint = <&pmic_glink_sbu>;
 			};
 		};
        };
-- 
2.34.1

Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: qcom: sm8650-hdk: Fix compile warnings in typec-mux node

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 04/12/2025 03:59, Krishna Kurapati wrote:
> With W=1, the following error comes up:
> 
> Warning (graph_child_address): /soc@0/geniqup@ac0000/i2c@a8c000/typec-mux@e/ports: graph node has single child node 'port@0', #address-cells/#size-cells are not necessary

We don't fix these warnings if they lead to incomplete or incorrect
code. We discussed this already ~2 years ago.

Explain why you claim there is no altmode switching here on WCD938x
side? IOW, why incomplete DTS is the correct one.

Before blindly fixing such warnings, you really need to think about the
fix and solve it in correct way. Otherwise you got the same comment as
last time - please stop hammering every possible issue just because you
have the hammer and you see something which can be hammered...


Best regards,
Krzysztof