From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rajendra Nayak Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/9] clk: qcom: gcc-msm8960: add child devices support. Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2015 08:39:06 +0530 Message-ID: <55CD5BD2.3070907@codeaurora.org> References: <1436348838-22671-1-git-send-email-rnayak@codeaurora.org> <1436348838-22671-6-git-send-email-rnayak@codeaurora.org> <20150811224902.GO2839@codeaurora.org> <55CB0B26.2020105@linaro.org> <55CC1CFE.7000005@codeaurora.org> <20150814004206.GU26614@codeaurora.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20150814004206.GU26614@codeaurora.org> Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Stephen Boyd Cc: Srinivas Kandagatla , linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, lina.iyer@linaro.org, nrajan@codeaurora.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org [].. >>>> Also, I don't like having a subnode in DT. Why can't we use the >>>> same node as the GCC node and create a virtual child device here >>>> for tsens? We can assign the same of_node that this platform >>>> device has so that DT keeps working correctly. >> >> So the current driver looks up data based on compatible strings. > > The tsens device is always the same piece of hardware. The only Well, not always. The one in 8960 does need additional initializations, requires you to save/restore context as it can be powered off not being in an always powered on domain etc. > thing that's changing is the qfprom data and the number of > sensors. So we should be looking at the qfprom compatible string How? Tsens uses nvmem framework apis to read the qfprom atleast in this series. > to figure out how to interpret the qfprom data which would > include the number of sensors and how the data is encoded. > >> So you suggesting to create a virtual child device for gcc and >> associate the gcc DT node to it? (And have the tsens compatible >> mentioned as part of the gcc DT node?) > > No. The driver should work just fine without having to > interrogate the device's compatible string. If we still need the > compatible check for some reason, then we can always match based > on qcom,gcc-msm8960, qcom,gcc-apq8064, etc. But I don't see why Thats not quite possible I guess. 2 drivers (gcc and tsens) matching the same compatibles? Will it not just depend on which ends up being the first match? > we need to do that when we should be looking at what type of > qfprom is connected so we can correctly parse the data.