From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Boyd Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] PM / OPP: Add "opp-supported-hw" binding Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2015 14:08:14 -0800 Message-ID: <20151104220814.GS19782@codeaurora.org> References: <2d52388bd7d3cc546ac3ab5afeb47bfcb3012213.1446167359.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org> <20151030221826.GM19782@codeaurora.org> <20151103022933.GN3639@ubuntu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20151103022933.GN3639@ubuntu> Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Viresh Kumar Cc: Rafael Wysocki , robh+dt@kernel.org, lee.jones@linaro.org, linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, pawel.moll@arm.com, ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk, galak@codeaurora.org, nm@ti.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, open list , "Rafael J. Wysocki" List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 11/03, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 30-10-15, 15:18, Stephen Boyd wrote: > > A side-note. I wonder if it would be better style to have the > > node name be: > > > > opp@600000000 { > > > > At least it seems that the assumption is we can store all the > > possible combinations of OPP values for a particular frequency in > > the same node. Following this style would make dt compilation > > fail if two nodes have the same frequency. > > From: Viresh Kumar > Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2015 07:51:09 +0530 > Subject: [PATCH] PM / OPP: Rename OPP nodes as opp@ > > It would be better to name OPP nodes as opp@ as that will ensure > that multiple DT nodes don't contain the same frequency. Of course we > expect the writer to name the node with its opp-hz frequency and not any > other frequency. > > And that will let the compile error out if multiple nodes are using the > same opp-hz frequency. > > Suggested-by: Stephen Boyd > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar > --- Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project