From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Viresh Kumar Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] Add cpufreq support Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2016 18:46:25 +0530 Message-ID: <20160208131625.GI8294@vireshk> References: <56B4D4BE.2040008@free.fr> <45004963.Im3DmqJ5ez@wuerfel> <20160208124127.GF8294@vireshk> <22002072.L04zy0K2AP@wuerfel> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail-pa0-f53.google.com ([209.85.220.53]:34060 "EHLO mail-pa0-f53.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751183AbcBHNQ3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Feb 2016 08:16:29 -0500 Received: by mail-pa0-f53.google.com with SMTP id uo6so74922043pac.1 for ; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 05:16:29 -0800 (PST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <22002072.L04zy0K2AP@wuerfel> Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Mason , linux-pm On 08-02-16, 14:10, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > I don't remember the exact discussion, but the compatible string is > exactly meant to do one thing: it tells you what you can or cannot do > with one device. Yeah, and many people argued that we can't add two values to that string like: "cpufreq-dt" and "cpufreq-big-little" for same kind of OPP bindings, as a different compatible string should be required only if there is a difference in the bindings. For example, if a platform (like ST did recently) adds more platform-specific properties, then they can define a new value of those strings. > I had not realized that we don't even have a compatible string > for opp-v2, so if we are missing that, we obviously can't compare > against that string. The binding says that we can have a string, but its not compulsory yet. Its only used by STM as they have some specific properties of their own. > I thought there was a compatible property in there that told us > whether the operating-points-v2/cooling-min-level/#cooling-cells/... > properties were considered valid. Yeah, "OPP-v2" DT node can have a compatible string, which isn't compulsory as of now, but because of the reasons mentioned earlier, we can't use it to differentiate between drivers that use exactly same version of bindings. -- viresh