Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: reserved-memory: rmtfs: Document qcom,assign-to-nav

[Konrad Dybcio]

On 6.01.2023 18:55, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 02, 2023 at 05:50:33PM +0100, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>> Some SoCs mandate that the RMTFS is also assigned to the NAV VM, while
>> others really don't want that. Since it has to be conditional, add a
>> bool property to toggle this behavior.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> v1 -> v2:
>> - Rewrite the newly added description
>>
>>  .../devicetree/bindings/reserved-memory/qcom,rmtfs-mem.yaml | 6 ++++++
>>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reserved-memory/qcom,rmtfs-mem.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reserved-memory/qcom,rmtfs-mem.yaml
>> index 2998f1c8f0db..4026788a4e40 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reserved-memory/qcom,rmtfs-mem.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reserved-memory/qcom,rmtfs-mem.yaml
>> @@ -31,6 +31,12 @@ properties:
>>      description: >
>>        vmid of the remote processor, to set up memory protection
>>  
>> +  qcom,assign-to-nav:
>> +    type: boolean
>> +    description:
>> +      Whether to also assign the region to a third (NAV) VM, as opposed to
>> +      the usual 2.
> 
> For better or worse, the binding currently takes the vmid of the first
> instance in qcom,vmid. Would it not be cleaner to turn qcom,vmid into an
> array and pass the nav vmid as a second element in that array?
I suppose I could do that..

Konrad
> 
> Regards,
> Bjorn
> 
>> +
>>  required:
>>    - qcom,client-id
>>  
>> -- 
>> 2.39.0
>>