From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tomasz Figa Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] Documentation: devicetree: Add boost-frequency binding to list boost mode frequency Date: Fri, 30 May 2014 20:41:47 +0200 Message-ID: <5388D0EB.1090001@gmail.com> References: <1401440477-4328-1-git-send-email-thomas.ab@samsung.com> <1401440477-4328-3-git-send-email-thomas.ab@samsung.com> <20140530130827.GK24233@leverpostej> <5388CAC5.5010607@gmail.com> <5388D02D.4020209@arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <5388D02D.4020209@arm.com> Sender: linux-samsung-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Sudeep Holla , Thomas Abraham , Mark Rutland Cc: "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "rjw@rjwysocki.net" , "linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org" , "kgene.kim@samsung.com" , "t.figa@samsung.com" , "l.majewski@samsung.com" , "viresh.kumar@linaro.org" , "nm@ti.com" , Rob Herring , Pawel Moll , Ian Campbell , Kumar Gala List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 30.05.2014 20:38, Sudeep Holla wrote: > On 30/05/14 19:15, Tomasz Figa wrote: >> On 30.05.2014 20:05, Thomas Abraham wrote: >>> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 6:38 PM, Mark Rutland >>> wrote: [snip] >>>> Why are these in both operating-points and boost-frequencies? It'll be >>>> really easy to accidentally forget to mark something as a >>>> boost-frequency this way. Why not have a boost-points instead? >>> > > I was told that index is not preferred based on the previous discussions > when the OPP bindings were designed. In addition the OPP binding doesn't > enforce any ordering. There are thermal bindings that assume otherwise and > is broken. So boost-points is not feasible. > My understanding of Mark's comment was that the boost-points property would use the same format as operating-points and parsing code would just concatenate operating points with boost points after making the latter with necessary flag or whatever. Best regards, Tomasz