From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751045AbbFLFLW (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Jun 2015 01:11:22 -0400 Received: from mail-pd0-f176.google.com ([209.85.192.176]:36197 "EHLO mail-pd0-f176.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750813AbbFLFLS (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Jun 2015 01:11:18 -0400 Message-ID: <557A69E5.5080701@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2015 13:11:01 +0800 From: Caesar Wang User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kevin Hilman , =?UTF-8?B?SGVpa28gU3TDvGJuZXI=?= CC: Caesar Wang , tomasz.figa@gmail.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linus.walleij@linaro.org, robh+dt@kernel.org, pawel.moll@arm.com, mark.rutland@arm.com, galak@codeaurora.org, grant.likely@linaro.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, rdunlap@infradead.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, dianders@chromium.org, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, ulf.hansson@linaro.org, dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com, broonie@kernel.org, ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk, linux@arm.linux.org.uk Subject: Re: [PATCH v14 0/3] ARM: rk3288: Add PM Domain support References: <1429862868-14218-1-git-send-email-wxt@rock-chips.com> <3550912.kR0pejLP0h@diego> <7h383lzaqt.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> In-Reply-To: <7h383lzaqt.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Kevin, Heiko Thanks for your comments. Sorry for delay reply. 在 2015年04月28日 02:28, Kevin Hilman 写道: > Heiko Stübner writes: > >> Am Freitag, 24. April 2015, 16:07:45 schrieb Caesar Wang: >>> Add power domain drivers based on generic power domain for >>> Rockchip platform, and support RK3288. >>> >>> Verified on url = >>> https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromiumos/third_party/kernel. >>> >>> At the moment,there are mass of products are using the driver. >>> I believe the driver can happy work for next kernel. >> I've taken a look at the driver and here are some global remarks: >> >> (1) You provide dt-bindings/power-domain/rk3288.h in patch 3. This breaks >> bisectability, as the driver itself in patch 2 also includes the header and >> would thus fail to compile if the later patch 3 is missing. >> Ideally I think the header addition should be a separate patch itself, so that >> we can possibly share it between driver and dts branches. >> So 1: binding doc, 2: binding-header, 3: driver, 4: dts-changes. OK, done. >> >> (2) The dts-changes in patch 3 should also add any necessary power-domain >> assignment on devices if they're still missing, so that we don't introduce >> regressions. In my case my work-in-progress edp died because the powerdomain >> was turned off automatically it seems. OK, I will list that devices. At the moment, I don't find the EDP driver for rockchip. (I think the EDP driver hasn't a upstream). Anyway, I will test it on https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromiumos/third_party/kernel/+/chromeos-3.14, Meanwhile work on next-kernel. >> >> (3) more like wondering @Kevin or so, is there some more generic place for a >> power-domain driver nowadays? > I think the preference has been to put these under drivers/soc/ for now, > so they can shared across arm32 and arm64. > Interesting. Do you want to put the domain driver into /driver/soc/rockchip? I guess the efuse driver ...is also do that. Perhaps, it's a good select in the future. >> (4) As Tomasz remarked previously the dts should represent the hardware and >> the power-domains are part of the pmu. There is a recent addition from Linus >> Walleij, called simple-mfd [a] that is supposed to get added real early for >> kernel 4.2. So I'd think the power-domains should use that and the patchset >> modified to include the changes shown below [b]? >> >> (5) Keven Hilman and Tomasz had reservations about all the device clocks >> being listed in the power-domains itself in the previous versions. I don't see >> a comment from them yet changing that view. > Correct. How about this patch? https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/5145241/ I will do that. Maybe, do you have more suggestions? >> Their wish was to get the clocks by reading the clocks from the device nodes, >> though I see a problem on how to handle devices that do not have any bindings >> at all yet. >> >> Kevin, Tomasz any new thoughts? > I don't see any issues with devices that don't have bindings, as all > that would be needed would be to simple device nodes with a clock > property. I wouldn't even matter if those devices had device drivers. > > Kevin > > > From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: caesar.upstream@gmail.com (Caesar Wang) Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2015 13:11:01 +0800 Subject: [PATCH v14 0/3] ARM: rk3288: Add PM Domain support In-Reply-To: <7h383lzaqt.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> References: <1429862868-14218-1-git-send-email-wxt@rock-chips.com> <3550912.kR0pejLP0h@diego> <7h383lzaqt.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> Message-ID: <557A69E5.5080701@gmail.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi Kevin, Heiko Thanks for your comments. Sorry for delay reply. ? 2015?04?28? 02:28, Kevin Hilman ??: > Heiko St?bner writes: > >> Am Freitag, 24. April 2015, 16:07:45 schrieb Caesar Wang: >>> Add power domain drivers based on generic power domain for >>> Rockchip platform, and support RK3288. >>> >>> Verified on url = >>> https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromiumos/third_party/kernel. >>> >>> At the moment,there are mass of products are using the driver. >>> I believe the driver can happy work for next kernel. >> I've taken a look at the driver and here are some global remarks: >> >> (1) You provide dt-bindings/power-domain/rk3288.h in patch 3. This breaks >> bisectability, as the driver itself in patch 2 also includes the header and >> would thus fail to compile if the later patch 3 is missing. >> Ideally I think the header addition should be a separate patch itself, so that >> we can possibly share it between driver and dts branches. >> So 1: binding doc, 2: binding-header, 3: driver, 4: dts-changes. OK, done. >> >> (2) The dts-changes in patch 3 should also add any necessary power-domain >> assignment on devices if they're still missing, so that we don't introduce >> regressions. In my case my work-in-progress edp died because the powerdomain >> was turned off automatically it seems. OK, I will list that devices. At the moment, I don't find the EDP driver for rockchip. (I think the EDP driver hasn't a upstream). Anyway, I will test it on https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromiumos/third_party/kernel/+/chromeos-3.14, Meanwhile work on next-kernel. >> >> (3) more like wondering @Kevin or so, is there some more generic place for a >> power-domain driver nowadays? > I think the preference has been to put these under drivers/soc/ for now, > so they can shared across arm32 and arm64. > Interesting. Do you want to put the domain driver into /driver/soc/rockchip? I guess the efuse driver ...is also do that. Perhaps, it's a good select in the future. >> (4) As Tomasz remarked previously the dts should represent the hardware and >> the power-domains are part of the pmu. There is a recent addition from Linus >> Walleij, called simple-mfd [a] that is supposed to get added real early for >> kernel 4.2. So I'd think the power-domains should use that and the patchset >> modified to include the changes shown below [b]? >> >> (5) Keven Hilman and Tomasz had reservations about all the device clocks >> being listed in the power-domains itself in the previous versions. I don't see >> a comment from them yet changing that view. > Correct. How about this patch? https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/5145241/ I will do that. Maybe, do you have more suggestions? >> Their wish was to get the clocks by reading the clocks from the device nodes, >> though I see a problem on how to handle devices that do not have any bindings >> at all yet. >> >> Kevin, Tomasz any new thoughts? > I don't see any issues with devices that don't have bindings, as all > that would be needed would be to simple device nodes with a clock > property. I wouldn't even matter if those devices had device drivers. > > Kevin > > >