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=-2.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no 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 E6777C76194 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 23:35:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFB8921951 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 23:35:05 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1563838505; bh=ea7bbNWwRc2Jb5gKkCuC0BfPuCo9gTUGpILmdaKsYTc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=OATYoI4Qe63fMpfkfM/4t5xFVeqas29nRqf88PD2xh2VBXI4TWsX4NgNbgXefQZRv LEip77C09WSBz0E1OZFTKBCnMOyaI6bmWcwUFpiM+YgVfEIARcAWsv9L4DezT1w0rN oHaXwWJ99phjYtXNwOJrTz+XdEZL6KdkUGAROPZs= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730992AbfGVXfE (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Jul 2019 19:35:04 -0400 Received: from mail-io1-f65.google.com ([209.85.166.65]:40178 "EHLO mail-io1-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727157AbfGVXfE (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Jul 2019 19:35:04 -0400 Received: by mail-io1-f65.google.com with SMTP id h6so77814041iom.7; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 16:35:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=+1l4y3t2UMkEkO+/MJw8aq8fSMYsxde02LarPu3Ozik=; b=ZkUvj4cBeAW+x/BaVktMrSHfQkkWUySP21C/SpHbVPlPzwo7rJwqT4lYcClNpOAjRw hv8FxCZWvOfyWFwFujwi16xOoyQgUQPDjJB8CfF7otkaDBU01GAm2Qx0OzllZtrVQgU2 6HMGS7cWwGiFeQz0kPUR+AQeCX3e/7FYqvcemPGlo9zmu6/zIPRp714BnKFY7ubpKAtr 4+PeYP2JQxsVKNhJYcc9LpNptQDiSl1WKU10loHDHwPC8ZALpb3W7nQnjSmaRatp6KrL ic7LPdzafuyaEKfiqXs4PKeVHS5gqWp+5SQ8xjKjlnh+4VHTkEPDSciCFkf62HZVxiOi ebSA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUHLw/nZcSp5IuZanQcy7hTEdi+fupBsDPgacyeRrbgrEYE4PSy EeB0FULVJuHv/NSTfLgwzg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxPtT8L1B/fbW9iJFp4+RBI7uFqvTbw19TSSehSOpu+f76R4vtucET4OI7dIY9HOM2hAJhqNA== X-Received: by 2002:a6b:dd17:: with SMTP id f23mr55075087ioc.213.1563838503145; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 16:35:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([64.188.179.254]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v10sm36428164iob.43.2019.07.22.16.35.02 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=AEAD-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 22 Jul 2019 16:35:02 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 17:35:01 -0600 From: Rob Herring To: Saravana Kannan Cc: Sibi Sankar , Georgi Djakov , Mark Rutland , Viresh Kumar , Nishanth Menon , Stephen Boyd , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Vincent Guittot , "Sweeney, Sean" , daidavid1@codeaurora.org, Rajendra Nayak , Bjorn Andersson , Evan Green , Android Kernel Team , Linux PM , "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" , LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/6] dt-bindings: opp: Introduce opp-peak-KBps and opp-avg-KBps bindings Message-ID: <20190722233501.GA19594@bogus> References: <20190703011020.151615-1-saravanak@google.com> <20190703011020.151615-2-saravanak@google.com> <98b2e315-e8da-80ad-1ef8-e6b222c1c6fe@codeaurora.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 11:58:08AM -0700, Saravana Kannan wrote: > On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 10:25 AM Sibi Sankar wrote: > > > > Hey Saravana, > > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10850815/ > > There was already a discussion ^^ on how bandwidth bindings were to be > > named. > > Yes, I'm aware of that series. That series is trying to define a BW > mapping for an existing frequency OPP table. This patch is NOT about > adding a mapping to an existing table. This patch is about adding the > notion of BW OPP tables where BW is the "key" instead of "frequency". > > So let's not mixed up these two series. Maybe different reasons, but in the end we'd end up with 2 bandwidth properties. We need to sort out how they'd overlap/coexist. The same comment in that series about defining a standard unit suffix also applies to this one. Rob