Hi Julien,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Julien Grall <jul...@xen.org>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] docs, xen/arm: Introduce static heap memory
> 
> Hi Henry,
> 
> While reviewing the binding sent by Penny I noticed some inconsistency
> with the one you introduced. See below.
> 
> On 07/09/2022 09:36, Henry Wang wrote:
> > +- xen,static-heap
> > +
> > +    Property under the top-level "chosen" node. It specifies the address
> > +    and size of Xen static heap memory. Note that at least a 64KB
> > +    alignment is required.
> > +
> > +- #xen,static-heap-address-cells and #xen,static-heap-size-cells
> > +
> > +    Specify the number of cells used for the address and size of the
> > +    "xen,static-heap" property under "chosen".
> > +
> > +Below is an example on how to specify the static heap in device tree:
> > +
> > +    / {
> > +        chosen {
> > +            #xen,static-heap-address-cells = <0x2>;
> > +            #xen,static-heap-size-cells = <0x2>;
> 
> Your binding, is introduce #xen,static-heap-{address, size}-cells
> whereas Penny's one is using #{address, size}-cells even if the property
> is not "reg".
> 
> I would like some consistency in the way we define bindings. Looking at
> the tree, we already seem to have introduced
> #xen-static-mem-address-cells. So maybe we should follow your approach?
> 
> That said, I am wondering whether we should just use one set of property
> name.

IMO now we have the pair
#xen,static-heap-{address, size}-cells and xen,static-heap for static heap.
and the pair
#xen,static-mem-{address, size}-cells and xen,static-mem for static
memory allocation for dom0less.

So at least these two are consistent.

I guess the concern you raised is related to the static shared memory for
dom0less,
...

> 
> I am open to suggestion here. My only request is we are consistent (i.e.
> this doesn't depend on who wrote the bindings).

I am not sure if Penny and Stefano have some specific requirements
regarding the static shared memory usage. So I will wait for Stefano's input.
But yeah we need to keep the consistency so if we are agreed that I need to
change the binding, I will do the corresponding change.

Kind regards,
Henry

> 
> Cheers,
> 
> --
> Julien Grall

Reply via email to