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

[Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>]

On 13/12/2022 18:03, 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@linaro.org>
> ---
>  .../devicetree/bindings/reserved-memory/qcom,rmtfs-mem.yaml  | 5 +++++
>  1 file changed, 5 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..1d8c4621178a 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reserved-memory/qcom,rmtfs-mem.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reserved-memory/qcom,rmtfs-mem.yaml
> @@ -31,6 +31,11 @@ properties:
>      description: >
>        vmid of the remote processor, to set up memory protection
>  
> +  qcom,assign-to-nav:
> +    type: boolean
> +    description: >

No need for '>'

> +      whether to also assign the region to the NAV VM

Here and in property name you express desired Linux driver action, but
it is better to express the property of the hardware. What is
different/special in these SoCs or their configuration that additional
assignment is needed?


Best regards,
Krzysztof