From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755378AbdDLQ7S (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Apr 2017 12:59:18 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:47124 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752527AbdDLQ7P (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Apr 2017 12:59:15 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 2/9] PM / Domains: Use OPP tables for power-domains To: Viresh Kumar References: <5619ac7777689f282f8aafabbde22d71b46a979b.1490001099.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Cc: Rafael Wysocki , ulf.hansson@linaro.org, Kevin Hilman , Sudeep Holla , linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Vincent Guittot , Stephen Boyd , Nishanth Menon , robh+dt@kernel.org, lina.iyer@linaro.org, rnayak@codeaurora.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org From: Sudeep Holla Organization: ARM Message-ID: <6f72cb6e-2d8c-4e68-59cd-67f40e8c3118@arm.com> Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2017 17:58:41 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5619ac7777689f282f8aafabbde22d71b46a979b.1490001099.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 20/03/17 09:32, Viresh Kumar wrote: > The OPP table bindings contains all the necessary fields to support > power-domains now. Update the power-domain bindings to allow > "operating-points-v2" to be present within the power-domain node. > > Also allow consumer devices, that don't use OPP tables, to specify the > parent power-domain's performance level using the > "domain-performance-state" property. > > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar > --- > .../devicetree/bindings/power/power_domain.txt | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 42 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/power_domain.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/power_domain.txt > index 723e1ad937da..5db112fa5d7c 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/power_domain.txt > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/power_domain.txt > @@ -38,6 +38,9 @@ phandle arguments (so called PM domain specifiers) of length specified by the > domain's idle states. In the absence of this property, the domain would be > considered as capable of being powered-on or powered-off. > > +- operating-points-v2 : This describes the performance states of a PM domain. > + Refer to ../opp/opp.txt for more information. > + > Example: > > power: power-controller@12340000 { > @@ -118,4 +121,43 @@ The node above defines a typical PM domain consumer device, which is located > inside a PM domain with index 0 of a power controller represented by a node > with the label "power". > > +Optional properties: > +- domain-performance-state: A positive integer value representing the minimum > + power-domain performance level required by the consumer device. The integer > + value '0' represents the lowest performance level and the higher values > + represent higher performance levels. The value of "domain-performance-state" > + field should match the "domain-performance-state" field of one of the OPP > + nodes in the parent power-domain's OPP table. > + > + > + > +Example: > + > + domain_opp_table: opp_table { > + compatible = "operating-points-v2"; > + > + opp@1 { > + domain-performance-state = <1>; > + opp-microvolt = <975000 970000 985000>; > + }; > + opp@2 { > + domain-performance-state = <2>; > + opp-microvolt = <1075000 1000000 1085000>; > + }; > + }; > + > + parent: power-controller@12340000 { > + compatible = "foo,power-controller"; > + reg = <0x12340000 0x1000>; > + #power-domain-cells = <0>; > + operating-points-v2 = <&domain_opp_table>; As mentioned in the other email, it would be good to consider scalability with multiple power domains in a PM domain provider. i.e case of #power-domain-cells = <1> or more -- Regards, Sudeep