From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755791AbcDLCBM (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Apr 2016 22:01:12 -0400 Received: from gloria.sntech.de ([95.129.55.99]:55931 "EHLO gloria.sntech.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750719AbcDLCBK convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Apr 2016 22:01:10 -0400 From: Heiko Stuebner To: Kevin Hilman Cc: Elaine Zhang , xf@rock-chips.com, wxt@rock-chips.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, huangtao@rock-chips.com, zyw@rock-chips.com, xxx@rock-chips.com, jay.xu@rock-chips.com, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] dt-bindings: modify document of Rockchip power domains Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2016 04:00:10 +0200 Message-ID: <1560475.Omi7ovI7oB@phil> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.3.0-1-amd64; KDE/4.14.14; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <21140203.EjVS0MZtuq@phil> References: <1458285444-31129-1-git-send-email-zhangqing@rock-chips.com> <7hshznsqs4.fsf@baylibre.com> <21140203.EjVS0MZtuq@phil> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Kevin, Am Freitag, 18. März 2016, 23:16:55 schrieb Heiko Stuebner: > Am Freitag, 18. März 2016, 09:18:51 schrieb Kevin Hilman: > > Elaine Zhang writes: > > > Add qos example for power domain which found on Rockchip SoCs. > > > These qos register description in TRMs > > > (rk3036, rk3228, rk3288, rk3366, rk3368, rk3399) looks the same. > > > > This should describe in more detail what "qos" is in this context. At > > first glance, it's just a range of registers that lose context that need > > to be saved/restored. > > I guess that should be something like > > ---- 8< ---- > Rockchip SoCs contain quality of service (qos) blocks managing priority, > bandwidth, etc of the connection of each domain to the interconnect. > These blocks loose state when their domain gets disabled and therefore > need to be saved when disabling and restored when enabling a power-domain. > > These qos blocks also are similar over all currently available Rockchip > SoCs. > ---- 8< ---- does this look sane to you in terms of description, or do we need something more? Heiko From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: heiko@sntech.de (Heiko Stuebner) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2016 04:00:10 +0200 Subject: [PATCH v1 1/2] dt-bindings: modify document of Rockchip power domains In-Reply-To: <21140203.EjVS0MZtuq@phil> References: <1458285444-31129-1-git-send-email-zhangqing@rock-chips.com> <7hshznsqs4.fsf@baylibre.com> <21140203.EjVS0MZtuq@phil> Message-ID: <1560475.Omi7ovI7oB@phil> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi Kevin, Am Freitag, 18. M?rz 2016, 23:16:55 schrieb Heiko Stuebner: > Am Freitag, 18. M?rz 2016, 09:18:51 schrieb Kevin Hilman: > > Elaine Zhang writes: > > > Add qos example for power domain which found on Rockchip SoCs. > > > These qos register description in TRMs > > > (rk3036, rk3228, rk3288, rk3366, rk3368, rk3399) looks the same. > > > > This should describe in more detail what "qos" is in this context. At > > first glance, it's just a range of registers that lose context that need > > to be saved/restored. > > I guess that should be something like > > ---- 8< ---- > Rockchip SoCs contain quality of service (qos) blocks managing priority, > bandwidth, etc of the connection of each domain to the interconnect. > These blocks loose state when their domain gets disabled and therefore > need to be saved when disabling and restored when enabling a power-domain. > > These qos blocks also are similar over all currently available Rockchip > SoCs. > ---- 8< ---- does this look sane to you in terms of description, or do we need something more? Heiko