On Sunday 18 of August 2013 08:09:36 Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:

On Sat, 2013-08-17 at 12:50 +0200, Tomasz Figa wrote:

quoted

I wonder how would this handle uniprocessor ARM (pre-v7) cores, for
which
the updated bindings[1] define #address-cells = <0> and so no reg
property.

[1] - http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/260795

Why did you do that in the binding ? That sounds like looking to create
problems ...

[Copying Lorenzo...]

I'm not the author of the change. I was just passing by, while the 
question showed up in my mind. ;)

Traditionally, UP setups just used "0" as the "reg" property on other
architectures, why do differently ?

Right, especially since the ARM DT topology parsing code still considers a 
device tree without reg property in cpu node invalid.

Best regards,
Tomasz