On 08/15/2013 11:25 PM, Olof Johansson wrote: > On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 02:08:44PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote: >> On 08/09/2013 05:51 AM, Marek Szyprowski wrote: >>> Add device tree support for contiguous and reserved memory regions >>> defined in device tree. Initialization is done in 2 steps. First, the >>> memory is reserved, what happens very early when only flattened device >>> tree is available. Then on device initialization the corresponding cma >>> and reserved regions are assigned to each device structure. >> >> Hmmm. This seems an awful lot like putting SW configuration/policy >> information into DT rather than HW description. This feels like a >> slippery slope... Isn't this kind of thing better handled by a kernel >> command-line option to set up the CMA size? > > Sorry, you were not part of the in-person discussion since it happened > at Linaro Connect in Dublin. The concern is that we really need a way > to describe some of these _system_ properties. They're not necessarily > hardware properties, but they are well-known and likely properties of > the system that is running. OK, that seems reasonable enough. It's just the first I heard of this. I rather suspect that similar arguments will be applied to a bunch of other data people want to put into DT. I guess we'll just have to wait and see what gets proposed, and what really is "system data" rather than policy:-) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
