From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932665AbbJPTRE (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Oct 2015 15:17:04 -0400 Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:48435 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751922AbbJPTRB (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Oct 2015 15:17:01 -0400 Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 12:16:58 -0700 From: Stephen Boyd To: Viresh Kumar Cc: Rob Herring , Rafael Wysocki , nm@ti.com, linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, rob.herring@linaro.org, lee.jones@linaro.org, Mark Brown , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Ian Campbell , Kumar Gala , open list , Mark Rutland , Pawel Moll , "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/16] PM / OPP: Add 'supply-names' binding Message-ID: <20151016191658.GA16437@codeaurora.org> References: <2b87b162eabd1570ae2311e1ef8655acda72f678.1441972771.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org> <55F72C97.2030306@kernel.org> <20151016002243.GA23912@codeaurora.org> <20151016060227.GS19018@linux> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20151016060227.GS19018@linux> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 10/16, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 15-10-15, 17:22, Stephen Boyd wrote: > > I'm lost why we need this property at all. What happened to using > > > > opp-microvolt-0 = <1 2 3>; > > opp-microvolt-1 = <1>; > > opp-microvolt-2 = <3 4 5>; > > etc. > > Perhaps you are confusing this with the bindings we came up for > picking right voltage levels based on the cuts/version of the hardware > we are running on. The problem that Lee Jones mentioned and that can > be used in your case as well. Isn't that what this patch series is for? > > > That seems to avoid any problem with 3 vs. 1 element properties > > combined into one large array. > > That's not the problem I was trying to solve here. What problem are you trying to solve then? > > > Having supply-names seems too > > brittle and would tie us to a particular OPP user's decision to > > call supplies by some name. > > No. The name has to match the -supply property present in the > device's node, that's why we need this property :) Why does it need to match? Sorry I'm totally lost now. -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project