Re: [PATCH v3 01/10] arm64: dts: qcom: sdm845: Update PIL region memory map

From: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>
To: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
Cc: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@chromium.org>,
	Andy Gross <andy.gross@linaro.org>,
	David Brown <david.brown@linaro.org>,
	Sibi Sankar <sibis@codeaurora.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>,
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 01/10] arm64: dts: qcom: sdm845: Update PIL region memory map
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2019 16:30:41 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190123003041.GF31919@minitux> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAD=FV=UgQtPZj-EWCzqGqgAbfijjd+j7kO8XsXttJKfejEzBzg@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue 22 Jan 15:10 PST 2019, Doug Anderson wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 11:24 AM Bjorn Andersson
> <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue 22 Jan 10:58 PST 2019, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> >
> > > Quoting Bjorn Andersson (2019-01-21 21:51:03)
> > > > @@ -103,10 +138,30 @@
> > > >                         no-map;
> > > >                 };
> > > >
> > > > +               venus_mem: memory@95800000 {
> > > > +                       reg = <0 0x95800000 0 0x500000>;
> > > > +                       no-map;
> > > > +               };
> > > > +
> > > > +               cdsp_mem: memory@95d00000 {
> > > > +                       reg = <0 0x95d00000 0 0x800000>;
> > > > +                       no-map;
> > > > +               };
> > > > +
> > > >                 mba_region: memory@96500000 {
> > > >                         reg = <0 0x96500000 0 0x200000>;
> > > >                         no-map;
> > > >                 };
> > > > +
> > > > +               slpi_mem: memory@96700000 {
> > > > +                       reg = <0 0x96700000 0 0x1400000>;
> > > > +                       no-map;
> > > > +               };
> > > > +
> > > > +               spss_mem: memory@97b00000 {
> > > > +                       reg = <0 0x97b00000 0 0x100000>;
> > > > +                       no-map;
> > > > +               };
> > > >         };
> > > >
> > >
> > > What's the plan if certain configurations don't use all these carveouts?
> > > Can we mark the reservation nodes as status = "disabled", or the reverse
> > > and mark them as status = "ok" in all boards, and then reclaim the
> > > memory for peripherals we don't care to use?
> > >
> >
> > The code path that picks these up does look for "status", so I suggest
> > that we leave them all enabled in the platform dtsi and then let the
> > device's reclaim them as needed.
> 
> Does that mean we should add labels for all of the sub-nodes so that
> boards can easily mark them "disabled"?
> 

That sounds reasonable, I'll dig up some labels for the unlabeled nodes
as well.

Thanks,
Bjorn