From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kevin Hilman Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 04/10] ARM: OMAP3: hwmod: rename the smartreflex entries Date: Mon, 07 May 2012 16:55:37 -0700 Message-ID: <87r4uvwnpi.fsf@ti.com> References: <1335462041-4949-1-git-send-email-j-keerthy@ti.com> <1335462041-4949-5-git-send-email-j-keerthy@ti.com> <331ABD5ECB02734CA317220B2BBEABC13E9B1AA2@DBDE01.ent.ti.com> <87d36fzhkm.fsf@ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <87d36fzhkm.fsf@ti.com> (Kevin Hilman's message of "Mon, 07 May 2012 16:39:53 -0700") Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "J, KEERTHY" Cc: "AnilKumar, Chimata" , "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "rjw@sisk.pl" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org" , "Pihet-XID, Jean" List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org Kevin Hilman writes: > "J, KEERTHY" writes: [...] >>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/smartreflex.c b/arch/arm/mach-oma= p2/smartreflex.c >>>> index 2edd1e2..d859277 100644 >>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/smartreflex.c >>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/smartreflex.c >>>> @@ -183,7 +183,7 @@ static void sr_set_regfields(struct omap_sr *s= r) >>>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 sr->err_weight =3D= OMAP3430_SR_ERRWEIGHT; >>>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 sr->err_maxlimit = =3D OMAP3430_SR_ERRMAXLIMIT; >>>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 sr->accum_data =3D= OMAP3430_SR_ACCUMDATA; >>>> - =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 if (!(strcmp(sr->name,= "sr1"))) { >>>> + =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 if (!(strcmp(sr->name,= "smartreflex_mpu_iva"))) { >>> >>> What if voltage rail is different for mpu and iva? I have seen some= devices >>> supports SmartReflex have different voltage rails for mpu and iva. >>> >> >> I get the point. OMAP3 iva and mpu have a common rail. OMAP4 onwards >> even we have different rails for mpu and iva. I will enhance the che= cks here. > > Rather than enhancing the checks, this SoC specific data should proba= bly > just be made part of the SoC specific hwmod dev_attr. That being said, this is an additional feature we can add after this driver is moved. I would like this series to concentrate on the cleanups necessary to move to drivers/*, then additional features to support other SoCs can b= e added on top. Keerthy, please prepare a patch to generalize this to other SoCs by using dev_attr for this SoC specific data. We can add it after this series is merged upstream. Thanks, Kevin