From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Grant Likely Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2014 16:07:18 +0000 Subject: Re: [linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] dt-bindings: simplefb: Specify node location and handoff relate Message-Id: List-Id: References: <1415885645-24613-1-git-send-email-hdegoede@redhat.com> <5464C026.7030300@ti.com> <5464C444.4050101@redhat.com> <5464D3C7.7060707@ti.com> In-Reply-To: <5464D3C7.7060707@ti.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 3:52 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: > On 13/11/14 16:46, Hans de Goede wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 11/13/2014 03:28 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: >>> On 13/11/14 15:34, Hans de Goede wrote: >>> >>>> +chosen { >>>> + framebuffer0: framebuffer@5fc00000 { >>>> compatible = "simple-framebuffer"; >>>> - reg = <0x1d385000 (1600 * 1200 * 2)>; >>>> + reg = <0x5fc00000 (4096 * 1024)>; >>> >>> Was there a reason for this change? >> >> I changed the node name to match the new bindings text which >> specifies that the node name must be framebuffer@
, >> while at it I've taken a real world address range. >> >> I assume you refer to the bit where the size of the reg property >> is changed ? That indeed is not really necessary. > > Yes, I meant the size of the reg prop. As this is an example, I think it > should be as clear as possible. > > I guess a valid use case here is to set the size to larger-than-needed, > so that it gets preallocated and you don't need to worry about getting > the memory later when the system has already been running for a longer > time. But if that's the case in this example, I think it would be better > to describe it explicitly. Besides, we already have a mechanism for that called /reserved-memory. Any memory used by a framebuffer needs to be described in the reserved map anyway, and that region can be made larger than the firmware configured framebuffer. g.