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=-8.2 required=3.0 tests=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 930F9CA9EB9 for ; Sun, 27 Oct 2019 02:30:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D78B20863 for ; Sun, 27 Oct 2019 02:30:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726592AbfJ0Cag (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Oct 2019 22:30:36 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:53628 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726590AbfJ0Cag (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Oct 2019 22:30:36 -0400 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A9291FB; Sat, 26 Oct 2019 19:30:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from e107533-lin.cambridge.arm.com (unknown [172.31.20.19]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 84FF53F6C4; Sat, 26 Oct 2019 19:30:28 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2019 02:30:23 +0000 From: Sudeep Holla To: Ulf Hansson Cc: "Rafael J . Wysocki" , Daniel Lezcano , Lorenzo Pieralisi , Mark Rutland , Lina Iyer , Linux PM , Rob Herring , Vincent Guittot , Stephen Boyd , Bjorn Andersson , Kevin Hilman , Linux ARM , linux-arm-msm Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/13] cpuidle: psci: Add a helper to attach a CPU to its PM domain Message-ID: <20191027023023.GC18111@e107533-lin.cambridge.arm.com> References: <20191010113937.15962-1-ulf.hansson@linaro.org> <20191010113937.15962-11-ulf.hansson@linaro.org> <20191024163117.GB22036@bogus> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 06:47:43PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote: > On Thu, 24 Oct 2019 at 18:31, Sudeep Holla wrote: > > > > On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 01:39:34PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote: > > > Introduce a PSCI DT helper function, psci_dt_attach_cpu(), which takes a > > > CPU number as an in-parameter and tries to attach the CPU's struct device > > > to its corresponding PM domain. > > > > > > Let's makes use of dev_pm_domain_attach_by_name(), as it allows us to > > > specify "psci" as the "name" of the PM domain to attach to. Additionally, > > > let's also prepare the attached device to be power managed via runtime PM. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson > > > --- > > > drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-psci-domain.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++ > > > drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-psci.h | 6 ++++++ > > > 2 files changed, 27 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-psci-domain.c b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-psci-domain.c > > > index 3f5143ccc3e0..7429fd7626a1 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-psci-domain.c > > > +++ b/drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle-psci-domain.c > > > @@ -9,9 +9,11 @@ > > > > > > #define pr_fmt(fmt) "CPUidle PSCI: " fmt > > > > > > +#include > > > #include > > > #include > > > #include > > > +#include > > > #include > > > #include > > > #include > > > @@ -279,3 +281,22 @@ static int __init psci_idle_init_domains(void) > > > return ret; > > > } > > > subsys_initcall(psci_idle_init_domains); > > > + > > > +struct device *psci_dt_attach_cpu(int cpu) > > > +{ > > > + struct device *dev; > > > + > > > + /* Currently limit the hierarchical topology to be used in OSI mode. */ > > > + if (!psci_has_osi_support()) > > > + return NULL; > > > + > > > + dev = dev_pm_domain_attach_by_name(get_cpu_device(cpu), "psci"); > > > > This clarifies the need for the fixed name. But why not just go by index 0 > > as the consumer of these psci power-domains will have only one power domain > > entry. Why do we need this name compulsory ? > > The idea is to be future proof. If I recall correctly, the CPU node on > some QCOM SoCs may also have "CPR" PM domain specified, thus > "multiple" power-domains could be specified. > I am sure we don't want to mx-n-match any power domain provider with psci. And also I expect in these above mentioned cases, there won't be any psci power domains. > In any case, using "psci" doesn't really hurt, right? > Doesn't but I don't see need for one as only one should exist, as mentioned above we don't want mix-n-match with psci ever. > > Further, it's specified as > > optional in the generic binding, do we make it "required" for this psci > > idle states binding anywhere that I missed ? > > Good point! Unless you tell me differently, I will update the DT doc > to clarify this is "required". > No but why is my question ? We don't have to. If firmware/DT wants to specify the name, sure. But it must remain optional IMO. -- Regards, Sudeep