From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: broonie@kernel.org (Mark Brown) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 20:06:00 +0000 Subject: [RFC V2] OPP: Redefine bindings to overcome shortcomings In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20150128200600.GR21293@sirena.org.uk> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 04:14:50PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > +- opp-listN: > + List of nodes defining performance points. Following belong to the nodes > + within the opp-lists. Why is there the N here? It doesn't correspond to the examples... > + Required properties: > + - opp-khz: Frequency in kHz > + - opp-microvolt: voltage in micro Volts I thought the goal here was to specify ranges? > +- oppN: > + Operating performance point node per device. Devices using it should have its > + phandle in their "operating-points-v2" property. > + > + Required properties: > + - compatible: allow OPPs to express their compatibility. > + - opp-list: phandle to opp-list defined above. I don't understand what that compatible property is intended to mean and I expect other readers might be similarly confused - is it a standard compatbile property meaning this noe corresponds to some sort of device? There also appears to be no code matching these bindings... -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 473 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: