From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF999C83000 for ; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 16:38:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8D50208FE for ; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 16:38:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=mg.codeaurora.org header.i=@mg.codeaurora.org header.b="ayOb1vKH" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726539AbgD2Qi1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Apr 2020 12:38:27 -0400 Received: from mail27.static.mailgun.info ([104.130.122.27]:32927 "EHLO mail27.static.mailgun.info" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726456AbgD2Qi0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Apr 2020 12:38:26 -0400 DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; v=1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mg.codeaurora.org; q=dns/txt; s=smtp; t=1588178305; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: Date: Message-ID: From: References: Cc: To: Subject: Sender; bh=4s/uu5d90dFDcjdFr84ftHeij5DiBpvs7D+0ACrC89Y=; b=ayOb1vKH+P5Gqd/NuAe0RG0jMkjy5C1Gw92GUTIvrj9bf++Ljy/D4yux52b4VIp2RUYWxuXF sMp2+HoJrpzcdmzv4iscsdxdfE1lYg7U1I7g3X0rRq3GXdZ0umaIyw29o30jQ8fJXACQm5Wx OIkltOhalSghsCGo2+MPDovhF1I= X-Mailgun-Sending-Ip: 104.130.122.27 X-Mailgun-Sid: WyI1YmJiNiIsICJkZXZpY2V0cmVlQHZnZXIua2VybmVsLm9yZyIsICJiZTllNGEiXQ== Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org (ec2-35-166-182-171.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [35.166.182.171]) by mxa.mailgun.org with ESMTP id 5ea9ad81.7f88f590a500-smtp-out-n01; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 16:38:25 -0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id D243AC433BA; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 16:38:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.131.182.194] (blr-bdr-fw-01_GlobalNAT_AllZones-Outside.qualcomm.com [103.229.18.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: rnayak) by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 37E15C432C2; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 16:38:19 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 smtp.codeaurora.org 37E15C432C2 Authentication-Results: aws-us-west-2-caf-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=codeaurora.org Authentication-Results: aws-us-west-2-caf-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=rnayak@codeaurora.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 03/17] arm64: dts: sdm845: Add OPP table for all qup devices To: Matthias Kaehlcke Cc: viresh.kumar@linaro.org, sboyd@kernel.org, bjorn.andersson@linaro.org, agross@kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Stephen Boyd References: <1588080785-6812-1-git-send-email-rnayak@codeaurora.org> <1588080785-6812-4-git-send-email-rnayak@codeaurora.org> <20200429000234.GK4525@google.com> <20200429161046.GR4525@google.com> From: Rajendra Nayak Message-ID: <59f6fcbd-c7c5-c51f-cbb3-c9b980d7611b@codeaurora.org> Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2020 22:08:15 +0530 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200429161046.GR4525@google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: devicetree-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 4/29/2020 9:40 PM, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote: > On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 08:23:30PM +0530, Rajendra Nayak wrote: >> >> On 4/29/2020 7:45 PM, Rajendra Nayak wrote: >>> >>> On 4/29/2020 5:32 AM, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote: >>>> Hi Rajendra, >>>> >>>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 07:02:51PM +0530, Rajendra Nayak wrote: >>>>> qup has a requirement to vote on the performance state of the CX domain >>>>> in sdm845 devices. Add OPP tables for these and also add power-domains >>>>> property for all qup instances. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Rajendra Nayak >>>>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd >>>>> --- >>>>>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi | 115 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>>>   1 file changed, 115 insertions(+) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi >>>>> index 8f926b5..36b9fb1 100644 >>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi >>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi >>>>> @@ -804,6 +804,25 @@ >>>>>               clock-names = "core"; >>>>>           }; >>>>> +        qup_opp_table: qup-opp-table { >>>>> +            compatible = "operating-points-v2"; >>>>> + >>>>> +            opp-19200000 { >>>>> +                opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <19200000>; >>>>> +                required-opps = <&rpmhpd_opp_min_svs>; >>>>> +            }; >>>>> + >>>>> +            opp-75000000 { >>>>> +                opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <75000000>; >>>>> +                required-opps = <&rpmhpd_opp_low_svs>; >>>>> +            }; >>>>> + >>>>> +            opp-100000000 { >>>>> +                opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <100000000>; >>>>> +                required-opps = <&rpmhpd_opp_svs>; >>>>> +            }; >>>>> +        }; >>>>> + >>>> >>>> Judging from SDM845 (which has more OPP tables) the convention seems to be >>>> to add OPP tables to the nodes that use them, which seems reasonable and >>>> keeps them out of the device list. >>>> >>>> Unfortunately this convention isn't completely suitable for cases like this >>>> (and the DSI OPPs later in this series), where the same OPP table is used by >>>> multiple devices. A possible compromise would be to add the table to the >>>> node of the first device that uses them. >>> >>> Sounds fair, I will do that and respin. Thanks. >> >> Looking into this some more, I see we do have.. >> >> static const struct of_device_id of_skipped_node_table[] = { >> { .compatible = "operating-points-v2", }, >> {} /* Empty terminated list */ >> }; >> >> ..in drivers/of/platform.c, so its not being added to the device list. > > sure, I didn't mean that the OPP table is added by the kernel as a device, but > that the table breaks with the structure of the DT of device nodes ordered by > address. Ah ok, got it. > >> And atleast in case of qup, I am having to duplicate the OPP tables once for >> each qup instance. Not to mention, having them inside the first qup device >> just makes it a little confusing to read who the OPP table belongs to. > > I'm not advocating for duplicating the OPP tables. An alternative to having > them in the first QUP device could be to have an dedicated node with shared > opp tables outside of the device list, similar to thermal-zones. That sounds like a good idea too. > I tend to like consistency and the sprinkled in OPP tables break with that, > but ultimately it's up to Bjorn. Bjorn, any thoughts? -- QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation