Re: [PATCH v4 0/1] pstore/ram: add Device Tree bindings

[Kees Cook]

On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 2:59 PM, Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 03:50:58PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>> This is a "v4" of Greg Hackmann's DT bindings for ramoops. This is
>> what I'm going to land in the pstore tree unless there are strong and
>> convincing arguments against it. :)
>>
>> I made a number of changes based people's feedback, and I want to get
>> it unblocked. This patch is already carried by Android, and it doesn't
>> need to be out of tree.
>>
>> To respond to Arnd's comment: I like this as the ramoops node, not the
>> pstore node, since it describes the ramoops backend, not the pstore
>> subsystem, which has different controls, and can only have one backend
>> at a time. So it doesn't make sense to me to have this have a redundant
>> extra pstore node, since the very presence of ramoops implies pstore.
>
> Either I don't follow or you don't get Arnd's comment...
>
> IIRC, his suggestion which I agree with was to remove the memory-region
> phandle and just move all the properties into the reserved memory node
> directly. This simplifies things such that we are just describing
> properties of a chunk of memory rather than a Linux specific node for
> virtual driver.

Ah! Okay, I'm a DT newbie, so I think I misunderstood Arnd. :) If it's
easy, can you create a patch for that against the v4 I sent of Greg's
patch? I'm not sure how to do what you're suggesting. :)

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook
Chrome OS & Brillo Security