From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Will Deacon Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] ARM: perf: save/restore pmu registers in pm notifier Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2014 18:57:06 +0100 Message-ID: <20140703175706.GI17372@arm.com> References: <20140423170821.GJ5649@arm.com> <175CCF5F49938B4D99B2E3EF7F558EBE5507A3C1F1@SC-VEXCH4.marvell.com> <5360FB07.5030407@arm.com> <6106CAF835F351419ADA79E4836E6EC71B6A53C826@SC-VEXCH4.marvell.com> <9034CBD80F070943B59700D7F8149ED9A0875730@SC-VEXCH4.marvell.com> <20140513184503.GF16388@arm.com> <9034CBD80F070943B59700D7F8149ED9A087573F@SC-VEXCH4.marvell.com> <537337F3.4080300@arm.com> <9034CBD80F070943B59700D7F8149ED9A0875776@SC-VEXCH4.marvell.com> <9034CBD80F070943B59700D7F8149ED90182308172@SC-VEXCH4.marvell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9034CBD80F070943B59700D7F8149ED90182308172-r8ILAu4/owuq90oVIqnETxL4W9x8LtSr@public.gmane.org> Sender: devicetree-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Neil Zhang Cc: Sudeep Holla , "'linux-lFZ/pmaqli7XmaaqVzeoHQ@public.gmane.org'" , "'linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org'" , "'linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org'" , "'devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org'" List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 11:39:15AM +0100, Neil Zhang wrote: > > > > I will prepare another patch to add DT description under PMU since > > > > there is no generic power domain support for pm notifier if no other > > > concerns. > > > > We can change the manner if there is generic power domain support > > > > for > > > pm notifier later. > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > No, please don't add any DT bindings for power domains specific to PMU > > > node. > > > We can't change the DT bindings once added. > > > > > > As I pointed out the DT bindings for generic power domains are under > > > discussion. > > > See if you can reuse it, if not help in extending it so that it can be used. > > > > > > > Sorry for reply later. > > As I said before the under discussed generic power domain is not suitable for > > CPU peripherals since they are all known belong to CPU or cluster power > > domain. > > If we want to follow the way they are discussion, we need to register core > > and cluster power provider, and need vfp/gic/pmu etc to require them. > > Is it really suitable? > > > Do you have any comments? > If no, I would like to put it under PMU node. Sudeep is a better person to comment than me, but I'd still rather this was handled more generically as opposed to a PMU-specific hack. I don't see a problem including GIC and VFP here, but only when we actually need to save/restore them (i.e. what the hardware guys went crazy with the power domains). Will -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html