From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sylwester Nawrocki Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] ARM: dts: Use more descriptive names for Exynos5420 PDs Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2015 15:08:42 +0100 Message-ID: <54DA10EA.4010701@samsung.com> References: <1423244258-24314-1-git-send-email-javier.martinez@collabora.co.uk> <54D51170.10903@cogentembedded.com> <54D52905.6040100@collabora.co.uk> <54D9F1A4.1000908@cogentembedded.com> <1423570670.6241.2.camel@AMDC1943> <54D9F7B1.3030106@cogentembedded.com> <1423571438.6241.4.camel@AMDC1943> <54D9FD94.9000102@collabora.co.uk> <54DA0107.2020909@samsung.com> <1423574072.6241.8.camel@AMDC1943> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-reply-to: <1423574072.6241.8.camel@AMDC1943> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Krzysztof Kozlowski Cc: Javier Martinez Canillas , Sergei Shtylyov , Kukjin Kim , Andrzej Hajda , linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Marek Szyprowski List-Id: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org On 10/02/15 14:14, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On wto, 2015-02-10 at 14:00 +0100, Sylwester Nawrocki wrote: >> > On 10/02/15 13:46, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: >>>>>> > >>>> This debugfs code iterates over list of generic_pm_domains (gpd_list). I >>>>>>>>> > >>>> >> > cannot find function for translating from genpd to its platform device >>>>>>>>> > >>>> >> > so only genpd->name can be printed. >>>>>>> > >>> >> >>>>>>> > >>> >> Then why power domains aren't just named with the platform device names? >>>>> > >> > >>>>> > >> > Right, the mach-exynos/pm_domains.c set the name equal to OF node name. >>>>> > >> > I'll send a patch extending the name. >>>>> > >> > >>> > > IIRC the OF core uses the device node unit address and node name to create >>> > > the platform device names so you will have something like 10044000.power-domain. >>> > > >>> > > Same if using the node full_name since it will /power-domain@10044000. In both >>> > > cases the DTS should have to be checked to know which power domain really is >>> > > unless someone knows by heart the power domains addresses. > For the kernel developer that would be descriptive enough to find the > real domain but... as you said each time one would have to grep through > manual or DTS which is slower. However for end-user that still won't be > descriptive enough. > >>> > > >>> > > But if using generic names for the power domains as suggested by ePAPR is so >>> > > important then we should change all the other Exynos DTS files which don't do. >> > >> > Perhaps we could assign OF aliases to the power domain device nodes in DT >> > and then in the power domains driver map those aliases to more descriptive >> > names when creating the power domains? > > That would required additional alias in DT but it could be the most > descriptive for a user. Yes, we could fall back to of_node->full_name if alias is not present in DT. -- Regards, Sylwester From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: s.nawrocki@samsung.com (Sylwester Nawrocki) Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2015 15:08:42 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 1/1] ARM: dts: Use more descriptive names for Exynos5420 PDs In-Reply-To: <1423574072.6241.8.camel@AMDC1943> References: <1423244258-24314-1-git-send-email-javier.martinez@collabora.co.uk> <54D51170.10903@cogentembedded.com> <54D52905.6040100@collabora.co.uk> <54D9F1A4.1000908@cogentembedded.com> <1423570670.6241.2.camel@AMDC1943> <54D9F7B1.3030106@cogentembedded.com> <1423571438.6241.4.camel@AMDC1943> <54D9FD94.9000102@collabora.co.uk> <54DA0107.2020909@samsung.com> <1423574072.6241.8.camel@AMDC1943> Message-ID: <54DA10EA.4010701@samsung.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 10/02/15 14:14, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On wto, 2015-02-10 at 14:00 +0100, Sylwester Nawrocki wrote: >> > On 10/02/15 13:46, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: >>>>>> > >>>> This debugfs code iterates over list of generic_pm_domains (gpd_list). I >>>>>>>>> > >>>> >> > cannot find function for translating from genpd to its platform device >>>>>>>>> > >>>> >> > so only genpd->name can be printed. >>>>>>> > >>> >> >>>>>>> > >>> >> Then why power domains aren't just named with the platform device names? >>>>> > >> > >>>>> > >> > Right, the mach-exynos/pm_domains.c set the name equal to OF node name. >>>>> > >> > I'll send a patch extending the name. >>>>> > >> > >>> > > IIRC the OF core uses the device node unit address and node name to create >>> > > the platform device names so you will have something like 10044000.power-domain. >>> > > >>> > > Same if using the node full_name since it will /power-domain at 10044000. In both >>> > > cases the DTS should have to be checked to know which power domain really is >>> > > unless someone knows by heart the power domains addresses. > For the kernel developer that would be descriptive enough to find the > real domain but... as you said each time one would have to grep through > manual or DTS which is slower. However for end-user that still won't be > descriptive enough. > >>> > > >>> > > But if using generic names for the power domains as suggested by ePAPR is so >>> > > important then we should change all the other Exynos DTS files which don't do. >> > >> > Perhaps we could assign OF aliases to the power domain device nodes in DT >> > and then in the power domains driver map those aliases to more descriptive >> > names when creating the power domains? > > That would required additional alias in DT but it could be the most > descriptive for a user. Yes, we could fall back to of_node->full_name if alias is not present in DT. -- Regards, Sylwester