Re: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: OMAP2+: Powerdomain: Remove the need to always have a voltdm associated to a pwrdm

[Kevin Hilman <khilman@linaro.org>]

Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@ti.com> writes:

> The powerdomain framework expects all powerdomains to be associated with

s/expects/currently expects/

> a corresponding voltagedomain. For some SoCs' (like the already existing AM33xx
> family, or for the upcoming AM437x and DRA7 SoCs') which
> do not have a Voltage controller/Voltage Processor (neither the SR I2C
> bus to communicate with the PMIC) there is no need for a Powerdomain to have
> a voltage domain association (since they are really non scaleable, even
> though the voltage domains exist in place).

This last phrase inside the parentheses doesn't make sense to me.
Reading that makes me think that the lack of an on-chip voltage domain
means that evn an external regulators can't scale the voltage, which I
don't believe is the case.

> Extend the arch operations to add an api which the powerdomain core can
> then use to identify if a voltdm lookup and association for a powerdomain
> is really needed.

Yes, this idea looks right to me.

In addition to the wording above, a minor nit below...

[...]

> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/powerdomain.h b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/powerdomain.h
> index 140c360..8ed89de 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/powerdomain.h
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/powerdomain.h
> @@ -166,6 +166,7 @@ struct powerdomain {
>   * @pwrdm_disable_hdwr_sar: Disable Hardware Save-Restore feature for a pd
>   * @pwrdm_set_lowpwrstchange: Enable pd transitions from a shallow to deep sleep
>   * @pwrdm_wait_transition: Wait for a pd state transition to complete
> + * @pwrdm_has_voltdmi: Check if a voltdm association is needed

s/voltdmi/voltdm/

Kevin