-----Original Message-----
 From: Wood Scott-B07421
 Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2013 11:47 PM
 To: Liu Po-B43644
 Cc: Wood Scott-B07421; linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org; galak@kernel.crashing.or=

g;

 Fleming Andy-AFLEMING; Hu Mingkai-B21284
 Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] powerpc/85xx: Add silicon device tree for
 C293
=20
 On 07/30/2013 09:13:28 PM, Liu Po-B43644 wrote:
 >
 > >  -----Original Message-----
 > >  From: Wood Scott-B07421
 > >  Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2013 2:28 AM
 > >  To: Liu Po-B43644
 > >  Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org; galak@kernel.crashing.org; Fleming
 > Andy-
 > >  AFLEMING; Hu Mingkai-B21284; Liu Po-B43644
 > >  Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] powerpc/85xx: Add silicon device tree
 > for
 > >  C293
 > >
 > >  On 07/30/2013 03:49:22 AM, Po Liu wrote:
 > >  > +	crypto@80000 {
 > >  > +/include/ "qoriq-sec6.0-0.dtsi"
 > >  > +	};
 > >  > +
 > >  > +	crypto@80000 {
 > >  > +		reg =3D <0x80000 0x20000>;
 > >  > +		ranges =3D <0x0 0x80000 0x20000>;
 > >  > +
 > >  > +		jr@1000{
 > >  > +			interrupts =3D <45 2 0 0>;
 > >  > +		};
 > >  > +		jr@2000{
 > >  > +			interrupts =3D <57 2 0 0>;
 > >  > +		};
 > >  > +	};
 > >
 > >  Do these inline the way the example shows.
 > Sorry, Scott, I just remember in this way, the node can't be
 > recognized by system when run Uboot. The include can't be in the
 > crypto@80000. See the discussion in
 > http://git.am.freescale.net:8181/#/c/736/  .
 > Maybe I should re-modify the example file.
=20
 git.am.freescale.net is not accessible outside of Freescale; don't
 reference it on external lists.  In any case, I don't know what
 specifically you want me to look at there.  Just put the explanation her=

e.
Sorry, I've realize that.
The fact is that: when put the include into the crypto@xxxx, it can't compi=
le success(make c293pcie.dtb as example). Error will show as:

ERROR (duplicate_node_names): Duplicate node name /soc@fffe00000/crypto@800=
00/jr@1000
 =20

 I do not expect the dtc output to be any different between the two
 methods.  Could you check this (by using dtc to decompile the dtb
 afterward) and point out exactly how the output differs between the two
 approaches?

Since it will compile error in this way, so will not output .dtb file

=20
 -Scott