From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Florian Fainelli Subject: Re: Extending /memreserve/ to allow defining descriptions Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 16:12:59 -0800 Message-ID: References: <9c1cb5e8-2afd-e266-72b9-20ca6622956e@gmail.com> <20170306035856.GF12030@umbus.fritz.box> <87r32a6l43.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <87r32a6l43.fsf-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org> Sender: devicetree-spec-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Stewart Smith , David Gibson Cc: devicetree-spec-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, "devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , Rob Herring , glikely-s3s/WqlpOiPyB63q8FvJNQ@public.gmane.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 03/06/2017 03:28 PM, Stewart Smith wrote: > David Gibson 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