From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Viresh Kumar Subject: Re: [RFC V7 2/2] OPP: Allow "opp-hz" and "opp-microvolt" to contain magic values Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2017 10:02:36 +0530 Message-ID: <20171228043236.GA8652@vireshk-i7> References: <20171101214333.GG30645@codeaurora.org> <20171102045155.GX4240@vireshk-i7> <20171102071533.GM30645@codeaurora.org> <20171102090033.GZ4240@vireshk-i7> <20171130005029.GC19419@codeaurora.org> <20171130065907.GI11413@vireshk-i7> <20171227044526.GE8312@vireshk-i7> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: devicetree-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Rob Herring Cc: Stephen Boyd , Ulf Hansson , Kevin Hilman , Viresh Kumar , Nishanth Menon , Rafael Wysocki , "linux-pm-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , Vincent Guittot , Rajendra Nayak , Sudeep Holla , "devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , "linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 27-12-17, 15:36, Rob Herring wrote: > On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 10:45 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > On 26-12-17, 14:23, Rob Herring wrote: > >> > cpu_opp_table: cpu_opp_table { > >> > compatible = "operating-points-v2"; > >> > opp-shared; > >> > > >> > opp00 { > >> > opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <208000000>; > >> > clock-latency-ns = <500000>; > >> > power-domain-opp = <&domain_opp_1>; > >> > >> What is this? opp00 here is not a device. One OPP should not point to > >> another. "power-domain-opp" is only supposed to appear in devices > >> alongside power-domains properties. > > > > There are two type of devices: > > > > A.) With fixed performance state requirements and they will have the > > new "required-opp" property in the device node itself as you said. > > > > B.) Devices which can do DVFS (CPU, MMC, LCD, etc) and those may need > > a different performance state of the domain for their individual OPPs > > and so we can't have this property in the device all the time. > > > > Does this make sense ? > > No. From the definition for power-domain-opp > > "+- power-domain-opp: This contains phandle to one of the OPP nodes of > the master > + power domain. This specifies the minimum required OPP of the master > domain for > + the functioning of the device in this OPP (where this property is present). The per-opp thing was mentioned here. > + This property can only be set for a device if the device node contains the > + "power-domains" property. This was trying to say something else, though it wasn't clear and so your concerns. I wanted to say that the device node or its OPP nodes can have the "power-domain-opp" property only if the device node has a "power-domains" property. i.e. you need to have power domain first and then only the power-domain-opp property. > Also, either all or none of the OPP nodes in an OPP > + table should have it set." > > In the above example, you are violating the next to last sentence. > > Though, I'm now confused by what the last sentence means. Yeah, lets leave it as is as the V8 has changed this significantly and you already Acked it :) -- viresh -- 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