From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] PM / Domains: Add OF support Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2011 19:24:25 +0000 Message-ID: <20111226192424.GN8722@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> References: <1323704789-23923-1-git-send-email-thomas.abraham@linaro.org> <1323704789-23923-2-git-send-email-thomas.abraham@linaro.org> <201112262013.19995.rjw@sisk.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201112262013.19995.rjw@sisk.pl> Sender: linux-samsung-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Thomas Abraham , linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, rob.herring@calxeda.com, grant.likely@secretlab.ca, kgene.kim@samsung.com, patches@linaro.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 08:13:19PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Monday, December 12, 2011, Thomas Abraham wrote: > > A device node pointer is added to generic pm domain structure to associate > > the domain with a node in the device tree. > That sounds fine except for one thing: PM domains are not devices, so adding > "device node" pointers to them is kind of confusing. Perhaps there should be > something like struct dt_node, representing a more general device tree node? There's struct of_node which is exactly that, though practically speaking you need a device if you're going to bind automatically to something from the device tree in a sensible fashion and there is actual hardware under there so a device does make some sense. This is in part compatibility with the existing Exynos code which uses devices to probe the domains for non-DT systems.