Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] docs, xen/arm: Introduce static heap memory

[Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>]

Hi Henry,

While reviewing the binding sent by Penny I noticed some inconsistency 
with the one you introduced. See below.
On 07/09/2022 09:36, Henry Wang wrote:
> +- xen,static-heap
> +
> +    Property under the top-level "chosen" node. It specifies the address
> +    and size of Xen static heap memory. Note that at least a 64KB
> +    alignment is required.
> +
> +- #xen,static-heap-address-cells and #xen,static-heap-size-cells
> +
> +    Specify the number of cells used for the address and size of the
> +    "xen,static-heap" property under "chosen".
> +
> +Below is an example on how to specify the static heap in device tree:
> +
> +    / {
> +        chosen {
> +            #xen,static-heap-address-cells = <0x2>;
> +            #xen,static-heap-size-cells = <0x2>;
Your binding, is introduce #xen,static-heap-{address, size}-cells 
whereas Penny's one is using #{address, size}-cells even if the property 
is not "reg".
I would like some consistency in the way we define bindings. Looking at 
the tree, we already seem to have introduced 
#xen-static-mem-address-cells. So maybe we should follow your approach?
That said, I am wondering whether we should just use one set of property 
name.
I am open to suggestion here. My only request is we are consistent (i.e. 
this doesn't depend on who wrote the bindings).
Cheers,

--
Julien Grall