From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from service87.mimecast.com ([91.220.42.44]:34367 "EHLO service87.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754700Ab3GaKpl convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Jul 2013 06:45:41 -0400 Message-ID: <51F8EAE9.8080309@arm.com> Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 11:46:01 +0100 From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] PM / OPP: add support to specify phandle of another node for OPP References: <1375207217-4433-1-git-send-email-Sudeep.KarkadaNagesha@arm.com> <1375207217-4433-2-git-send-email-Sudeep.KarkadaNagesha@arm.com> <51F80750.8030701@wwwdotorg.org> In-Reply-To: <51F80750.8030701@wwwdotorg.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: devicetree-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Stephen Warren Cc: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha , "cpufreq@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "rob.herring@calxeda.com" , Pawel Moll , Mark Rutland , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Nishanth Menon List-ID: On 30/07/13 19:34, Stephen Warren wrote: > On 07/30/2013 12:00 PM, Sudeep KarkadaNagesha wrote: >> From: Sudeep KarkadaNagesha >> >> If more than one similar devices share the same OPPs, currently we >> need to replicate the OPP entries in all the nodes. >> >> Few drivers like cpufreq depend on physical cpu0 node to specify the >> OPPs and only that node is referred irrespective of the logical cpu >> accessing it. Alternatively to support cpuhotplug path, few drivers >> parse all the cpu nodes for OPPs. Instead we can specify the phandle >> of the node with which the current node shares the operating points. >> >> This patch adds support to specify the phandle in the operating points >> of any device node, where the node specified by the phandle holds the >> actual OPPs. > >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/opp.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/opp.txt > >> +Optional properties: >> +- operating-points-phandle: phandle to the device node with which this > > That's a funny name. Bikeshedding a bit, how about shared-operating-points? shared-operating-points makes sense, but I was thinking that name should indicate it's reference to the device that it shares OPP with. I agree 'operating-points-phandle' is no good, is 'shared-opp-device' any better ? Regards, Sudeep