Re: Extending /memreserve/ to allow defining descriptions

[Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>]

On 03/06/2017 03:28 PM, Stewart Smith wrote:
> David Gibson <david-xT8FGy+AXnRB3Ne2BGzF6laj5H9X9Tb+@public.gmane.org> writes:
>> What you could do is to add properties within the device tree further
>> annotating the reservations, with the extra structure essentially just
>> acting as an easy-to-parse summary of that.  In fact I know that POWER
>> systems firmware use 'reserved-ranges' and 'reserved-names' properties
>> for this.  I don't know if anyone else has adopted that though.
> 
> We've also been toying with the idea of creating a binding for "named
> reserved memory range that should probably show up in debugfs"
> 
> I'd also be happy with a standard binding to do it.

Seems like
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reserved-memory/reserved-memory.txt
may be a good place to add descriptive properties about what these
reserved regions are? The code parsing this also seems to be easily
extensible with adding custom "name" properties.

Using "reserved-names" sounds like a good thing, I will be looking into
submitting a binding update in the next few days, but if you beat me to
it, happy to review it.

Tangential: is it me, or it's possible for /memreserve/'s address and
size cells to disagree with #address-cells and #size-cells defined by
the top-level node?
-- 
Florian