On Tue, Jun 09, 2026 at 11:33:03AM -0600, Mathieu Poirier wrote: > [You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is > important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] > > On Tue, 9 Jun 2026 at 11:06, Frank Li <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jun 09, 2026 at 10:40:06AM -0600, Mathieu Poirier wrote: > > > [You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why > > > this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 05, 2026 at 04:36:18AM -0700, Laurentiu Mihalcea wrote: > > > > From: Laurentiu Mihalcea <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > The names of the carveout regions are derived using the names of the > > > > reserved memory devicetree nodes, which are referenced using the > > > > "memory-region" property. This adds a restriction on the names of said > > > > devicetree nodes, often bearing specific names such as: "vdevbuffer", > > > > "vdev0vring0", "rsc-table", etc... This goes against the devicetree > > > > specification's recommendation, which states that the devicetree node > > > > names should be generic. > > > > > > I don't see what is so restrictive in using the node name of the > > > reserved-memory > > > regions. Function of_reserved_mem_region_to_resource() is already doing > > > all the > > > parsing, packaging everything in a neat and easy to use "struct > > > resource". What > > > will you gain with this new "memory-region-names" that can't be done with > > > the > > > current solution? > > > > DT Binding check can't find such wrong if node name is not what expected. > > Binding can't restrict memory's node name because there ware not specific > > compatible string for it. > > > > But what "wrong" could that be, and what kind of restriction are you > hoping to enforce? What specific problem are you hoping to solve?
The sometime miss rsc-table or wrong use rsc_table as node name, dt check will be pass, but related driver will be failure. > > I'll wait to see what the DT people think about this - I personally > don't see the value in it. It will align dt spec and align ABI defination requirement. Node name can't be used as ABI except that is defined. It will elimiated this kinds hide ABI. Frank > > > Frank > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fix this by documenting an additional, optional property: > > > > "memory-region-names". This way, the carveout names can use the values > > > > passed via "memory-region-names", while keeping the devicetree node > > > > names of the reserved memory regions generic. > > > > > > > > There are no restrictions imposed on the values of the strings passed > > > > via > > > > the new property since the software allows any name to be used, with > > > > some > > > > names (e.g. "vdev%dbuffer", "vdev%dvring%d", "rsc-table") bearing a > > > > special meaning. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Laurentiu Mihalcea <[email protected]> > > > > --- > > > > .../devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/fsl,imx-rproc.yaml | 4 ++++ > > > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > diff --git > > > > a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/fsl,imx-rproc.yaml > > > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/fsl,imx-rproc.yaml > > > > index c18f71b64889..8e3e6676a95e 100644 > > > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/fsl,imx-rproc.yaml > > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/fsl,imx-rproc.yaml > > > > @@ -62,6 +62,10 @@ properties: > > > > minItems: 1 > > > > maxItems: 32 > > > > > > > > + memory-region-names: > > > > + minItems: 1 > > > > + maxItems: 32 > > > > + > > > > power-domains: > > > > minItems: 2 > > > > maxItems: 8 > > > > -- > > > > 2.43.0 > > > > > > >
