From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Boyd Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/17] PM / OPP: Parse clock-latency and voltage-tolerance for v1 bindings Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 16:36:50 -0800 Message-ID: <20160113003650.GC22188@codeaurora.org> References: <25cb4d7e9169815448193bd93305fae31a83792c.1450777582.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org> <20160112012905.GK22188@codeaurora.org> <20160112051413.GK1084@ubuntu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:54896 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752283AbcAMAgx (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jan 2016 19:36:53 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160112051413.GK1084@ubuntu> Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org To: Viresh Kumar Cc: Rafael Wysocki , linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, nm@ti.com On 01/12, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 11-01-16, 17:29, Stephen Boyd wrote: > > On 12/22, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > > @@ -580,6 +581,21 @@ static struct device_opp *_add_device_opp_reg(struct device *dev, > > > return NULL; > > > } > > > > > > + /* > > > + * Only required for backward compatibility with v1 bindings, but isn't > > > + * harmful for other cases. And so we do it unconditionally. > > > + */ > > > + np = of_node_get(dev->of_node); > > > + if (np) { > > > + u32 val; > > > + > > > + if (!of_property_read_u32(np, "clock-latency", &val)) > > > + dev_opp->clock_latency_ns_max = val; > > This is u64 type variable, but we are reading a 32 bit value from DT > and so wrote it that way. > > > > + of_property_read_u32(np, "voltage-tolerance", > > > + &dev_opp->voltage_tolerance_v1); > > And this is u32 type. > > > Why do we conditionalize the assignment for clock latency but not > > for voltage tolerance? > > Nothing more than what I described earlier. > Ok. -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project