On Fri, Mar 13, 2026 at 04:49:14PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 13/03/2026 14:38, Markus Schneider-Pargmann wrote: > > Hi Krzysztof, > > > > On Fri Mar 13, 2026 at 2:13 PM CET, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >> On Thu, Mar 12, 2026 at 04:49:02PM +0100, Markus Schneider-Pargmann (TI) > >> wrote: > >>> If memory-region is used, require memory-region-names. > >> > >> Why? > > > > This was a suggestion/comment from Conor in the last version: > > > > Is this really optional? Shouldn't it be made mandatory so that it is > > easy to tell the difference between the two configurations? > > Then write it in commit msg. You have entire commit msg to explain why > you are doing things, instead of obvious what. We can read the diff. > > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260303-hesitate-preoccupy-5e311cbd3e58@spud/ > > > >> > >> I don't understand also why this is a separate change, but maybe answer > >> to "Why are you doing it" would cover it as well. > > > > I made this a separate patch so the git tree never has any > > binding/devicectree warnings for memory-region-names even in-between > > patches. That's why I created these patches in this order: > > > > 1. Add the memory-region-names as an optional property. > > 2. Add memory-region-names to all users of memory-region. > > So what is the point of this if it is optional? IOW, what does this > commit achieve? Almost nothing. > > > 3. Make the property required if memory-region exists. > > but only required here? You need to organize your work in logical hunks.
My rationale for my original request was that the meaning of the second memory region is modified by this series. Previously it was always "firmware image sections", but now it can also be "IPC resources". Nothing changed in terms of the number of memory regions (it was 2-8 before and 2-8 after), so without making memory-region-names mandatory, there'd be no way to tell which of the two configurations are being used. This patch should likely be squashed with the patch adding memory-region-names, so that it is easily to provide an explanation for what's going on.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
