On Wed, Jun 10, 2026 at 02:10:37AM -0700, Laurentiu Mihalcea wrote: > > > On 6/10/2026 12:37 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 05, 2026 at 04:36:18AM -0700, Laurentiu Mihalcea wrote: > >> From: Laurentiu Mihalcea <[email protected]> > >> > >> The names of the carveout regions are derived using the names of the > >> reserved memory devicetree nodes, which are referenced using the > >> "memory-region" property. This adds a restriction on the names of said > >> devicetree nodes, often bearing specific names such as: "vdevbuffer", > >> "vdev0vring0", "rsc-table", etc... This goes against the devicetree > >> specification's recommendation, which states that the devicetree node > >> names should be generic. > > > > No, it does not. Names like rsc-table feels exactly like DT spec is > > asking - for a name matching purpose. Are you sure you read the spec? > > Quoting from the spec: > > "The name of a node should be somewhat generic, reflecting the function of the > device and not its precise programming model" > > and looking at the examples provided in "2.2.2 Generic Names Recommendation", > wouldn't "memory" be a more appropriate choice for the DT node name instead of > "rsc-table" since it's more generic, while still matching the purpose > of the device? Or perhaps I'm interpreting this the wrong way?
Please see https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAL_JsqKRW-=er+DCTob0HmQv9OyVt7yiej-Yht6UR-mcW=l...@mail.gmail.com/ Francesco
