Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] dt-bindings: sram: Document samsung,exynos850-acpm-sram

[Sam Protsenko]

On Mon, Jul 27, 2026 at 8:23 AM Alexey Klimov <alexey.klimov@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Document "samsung,exynos850-acpm-sram" which represents an SRAM region used
> for ACPM communication on Samsung-based SoCs.
>
> The SRAM is consumed as a whole, is not split up using child nodes and
> properties related to this are not required.
>
> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Alexey Klimov <alexey.klimov@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sram/sram.yaml | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sram/sram.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sram/sram.yaml
> index b83fc6831947..b9c4d4f3199b 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sram/sram.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sram/sram.yaml
> @@ -43,6 +43,7 @@ properties:
>          - qcom,rpm-msg-ram
>          - qcom,shikra-imem
>          - rockchip,rk3288-pmu-sram
> +        - samsung,exynos850-acpm-sram

Is there a reason we can't just use "mmio-sram" for Exynos850 ACPM
needs? I can see it's used in the gs101 device tree like this. If
there is a reason for this, I think it might be a good idea to
document it in the commit message (probably in both patches). Also,
should "mmio-sram" be added as a backup option (after comma) in your
[PATCH 2/2]?

>
>    reg:
>      maxItems: 1
> @@ -159,6 +160,7 @@ if:
>            enum:
>              - qcom,rpm-msg-ram
>              - rockchip,rk3288-pmu-sram
> +            - samsung,exynos850-acpm-sram
>  then:
>    required:
>      - "#address-cells"
>
> --
> 2.51.0
>