Re: [PATCH v5 3/6] powercap: dtpm: Remove duplicate RK3399 CPU hierarchy nodes

[Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>]

Am Dienstag, 3. November 2026, 05:48:17 Mitteleuropäische Normalzeit schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
> The DTPM CPU backend registers one powercap zone per cpufreq policy,
> not per CPU. On RK3399, CPUs sharing the same cpufreq policy therefore
> map to the same DTPM zone.
> 
> Remove the redundant CPU nodes from the RK3399 hierarchy and keep only
> one CPU node per cpufreq policy. The backend already suppresses duplicate
> registration through its per-CPU state, so the removed entries are
> redundant descriptions of the same zones. Keep both CPU policy domains
> and the GPU in the hierarchy, preparing for one created zone per generic
> hierarchy node.
> 
> Also fix indentation in the Rockchip device match table.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@oss.qualcomm.com>
> Reviewed-by: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>
> ---
> Changes in v5 (since v4):
> - Add Reviewed-by from Lukasz Luba; no code changes.
> 
> Changes in v4 (since v3):
> - Rebase on v7.3; no code or commit-description changes.
> 
> Changes in v3 (since v2):
> - Rebase on v7.3-rc7.
> - Fix Rockchip match-table indentation here rather than in patch 1.
> - Clarify that the existing backend suppresses duplicate registration.
> 
>  drivers/soc/rockchip/dtpm.c | 22 +++++-----------------
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/soc/rockchip/dtpm.c b/drivers/soc/rockchip/dtpm.c
> index b36d4f752c30..e71f315fbb6b 100644
> --- a/drivers/soc/rockchip/dtpm.c
> +++ b/drivers/soc/rockchip/dtpm.c
> @@ -20,30 +20,18 @@ static struct dtpm_node __initdata rk3399_hierarchy[] = {
>  	[2] = { .name = "/cpus/cpu@0",
>  		.type = DTPM_NODE_DT,
>  		.parent = &rk3399_hierarchy[1] },
> -	[3] = { .name = "/cpus/cpu@1",
> +	[3] = { .name = "/cpus/cpu@100",
>  		.type = DTPM_NODE_DT,
>  		.parent = &rk3399_hierarchy[1] },
> -	[4] = { .name = "/cpus/cpu@2",
> +	[4] = { .name = "/gpu@ff9a0000",
>  		.type = DTPM_NODE_DT,
>  		.parent = &rk3399_hierarchy[1] },
> -	[5] = { .name = "/cpus/cpu@3",
> -		.type = DTPM_NODE_DT,
> -		.parent = &rk3399_hierarchy[1] },
> -	[6] = { .name = "/cpus/cpu@100",
> -		.type = DTPM_NODE_DT,
> -		.parent = &rk3399_hierarchy[1] },
> -	[7] = { .name = "/cpus/cpu@101",
> -		.type = DTPM_NODE_DT,
> -		.parent = &rk3399_hierarchy[1] },
> -	[8] = { .name = "/gpu@ff9a0000",
> -		.type = DTPM_NODE_DT,
> -		.parent = &rk3399_hierarchy[1] },
> -	[9] = { /* sentinel */ }
> +	[5] = { /* sentinel */ }
>  };
>  
>  static struct of_device_id __initdata rockchip_dtpm_match_table[] = {
> -        { .compatible = "rockchip,rk3399", .data = rk3399_hierarchy },
> -        {},
> +	{ .compatible = "rockchip,rk3399", .data = rk3399_hierarchy },
> +	{},
>  };
>  
>  static int __init rockchip_dtpm_init(void)

checked against the cpu clusters, this of course looks correct

Reviewed-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>