From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4ED22531AFF; Thu, 15 Oct 2026 14:47:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1792075648; cv=none; b=LLUWG9Ut+k84HhAu8NnFF6RKarmwSjlCAYSLEX6qUzLOcAswAFhOcMtT13fFsEVCoxcT3ok+a2H0nGEdWkrOBJ4si22etVSqxF0FLkEwA6LvvN/BzJnpjM2BZQtGGPoQ8my7vwhiYXgIDV5FGa18653I4obBZfcfhMAtXdE7FP8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1792075648; c=relaxed/simple; bh=KzG89v5CWeQH6MocM3otV1sLC0DYM8lkvo0Iu6k29QU=; h=Message-ID:From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type: Date; b=JqbBJVT+NNVrUuXhMHxate1xx1//CKXel0DX9POxrx3ix26fxQt+p4HecsvKLwE/8LgHcAj7O0KriLf2oVorn2/yzk7PtzPqTgv0+dIP2rD1k9sI1RmRUKtcjTX8cYNIPtx7w1cP/A1OaJzrTOMSemnfxe9WhR0uhMTfp/68chs= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=o1kgJZRF; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="o1kgJZRF" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 576C91F000C4; Thu, 15 Oct 2026 14:47:26 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1792075647; bh=eg9B/NxbYIvgWaS4irB89TWyPCoFMmIo1ofL2+jADEM=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=o1kgJZRFWC2EQSMFRVrugBlmv0MnA60oliUflZJw1lnDKaseQbL546rNu8WC4e6PI M+zvVmRmWIVe/Sax6xEm6+PDKQ1kqnGG+Cp6fAkbjErG/M/Rekwk+ahPx0ABICIXq2 U2OG3gsiu0H3vx9ta4yGj+KGMqAvQMc+PudXDIQEbhSH5N0WH9Tv683m+LmvmsIgoO /UtpXQgLAePe7NSz4VSQH3WhBHmMriorncniLwiA2Wm6Yk5EUYcvERGZDwW2oQ34PY fRRj7PgzKCehOWhu2XMk4F4swycFt/CQMxtoCjI8yNf7q8CBPhgOrXomEIHNmZszBg wjxbsuzZVtnmg== Message-ID: From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] arm64: dts: freescale: add DT overlay for MX95-15x15-FRDM RPMSG usage Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: Frank.Li@oss.nxp.com Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, imx@lists.linux.dev, robh@kernel.org, conor+dt@kernel.org, Frank.Li@kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20261015-memory-region-name-v5-3-abc358b39a96@nxp.com> References: <20261015-memory-region-name-v5-0-abc358b39a96@nxp.com> <20261015-memory-region-name-v5-3-abc358b39a96@nxp.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2026 14:47:25 +0000 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(= s) to consider: - [Medium] dts: overlapping reserved-memory nodes due to mismatched node na= mes -- commit 9406ad5f04c442814590c1435b754dffaa93d0ea Author: Laurentiu Mihalcea arm64: dts: freescale: add DT overlay for MX95-15x15-FRDM RPMSG usage This commit adds an RPMSG device tree overlay for the MX95-15x15-FRDM board to support remoteproc and audio over rpmsg-usecases alongside the mx95evkrpmsg system manager configuration. > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx95-15x15-frdm-rpmsg.dtso b/= arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx95-15x15-frdm-rpmsg.dtso > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000000000..c3deb277edabf > --- /dev/null > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx95-15x15-frdm-rpmsg.dtso > @@ -0,0 +1,81 @@ [ ... ] > + reserved-memory { > + #address-cells =3D <2>; > + #size-cells =3D <2>; > + > + vdev0vring0: memory@88000000 { > + reg =3D <0 0x88000000 0 0x8000>; > + no-map; > + }; [Severity: Medium] Does this node name conflict with the base device tree? The base device tree imx95-15x15-frdm.dts defines this region using a different name: vdev0vring0: vdev0vring0@88000000 { reg =3D <0 0x88000000 0 0x8000>; no-map; }; Because device tree overlays merge by exact node name and unit-address, using a generic name like memory@88000000 here will prevent the overlay from overriding or merging with the existing node. Instead, it will create duplicate sibling nodes under /reserved-memory with identical physical addresses. Could this duplication cause the kernel's early memory reservation code (__rmem_check_for_overlap) to detect overlaps and trigger 'OF: reserved mem: OVERLAP detected!' errors during boot, or potentially duplicate DMA pools f= or the same memory? Would it be safer to reuse the exact base node names in the overlay, or omit the reserved-memory block entirely if the base tree already provides the necessary nodes? [ ... ] --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261015-memory-reg= ion-name-v5-0-abc358b39a96@nxp.com?part=3D3