From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751574AbeBHI4D (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Feb 2018 03:56:03 -0500 Received: from mail-ot0-f194.google.com ([74.125.82.194]:38102 "EHLO mail-ot0-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750948AbeBHI4B (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Feb 2018 03:56:01 -0500 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x225o7S/lnGEj++dEWbb6w0DcquR0QYLR8lbZnxT3dXWKOYDBG1O9fWiDJjKZFZMUoW7US6yaRxiHAhfH2TaEFh4= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <36aebdca-2a7d-07a3-8632-95992d74cae6@lechnology.com> References: <20180207134553.13510-1-brgl@bgdev.pl> <20180207134553.13510-2-brgl@bgdev.pl> <36aebdca-2a7d-07a3-8632-95992d74cae6@lechnology.com> From: Bartosz Golaszewski Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2018 09:56:00 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] dt-bindings: soc: new driver for DaVinci genpd To: David Lechner Cc: Rob Herring , Mark Rutland , Sekhar Nori , Kevin Hilman , Russell King , devicetree , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux ARM , Bartosz Golaszewski Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 2018-02-07 22:47 GMT+01:00 David Lechner : > On 02/07/2018 07:45 AM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: >> >> From: Bartosz Golaszewski >> >> Add a simple document for the DaVinci genpd driver. We use clock pm >> exclusively hence no reg property. >> >> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski >> --- >> .../devicetree/bindings/soc/ti,davinci-pm-domains.txt | 13 >> +++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+) >> create mode 100644 >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/ti,davinci-pm-domains.txt >> >> diff --git >> a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/ti,davinci-pm-domains.txt >> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/ti,davinci-pm-domains.txt >> new file mode 100644 >> index 000000000000..935d063c7b35 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/ti,davinci-pm-domains.txt >> @@ -0,0 +1,13 @@ >> +Device tree bindings for the genpd driver for Texas Instruments DaVinci >> SoCs >> + >> +Required properties: >> + >> +- compatible: must be "ti,davinci-pm-domains" >> +- #power-domain-cells: must be 0 >> + >> +Example: >> + >> +pwc1: power-controller@227000 { >> + compatible = "ti,davinci-pm-domains"; >> + #power-domain-cells = <0>; >> +}; >> > > > We already have the PSC @227000. Why not just add > #power-domain-cells = <0>; to that node instead of creating > a new "device" when this is really the same device? I thought about it too, but then noticed that most architectures do use a separate genpd driver even if it only calls routines placed in their respective clock driver. Let me prepare a v2 with this approach though. Thanks, Bartosz From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bartosz Golaszewski Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] dt-bindings: soc: new driver for DaVinci genpd Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2018 09:56:00 +0100 Message-ID: References: <20180207134553.13510-1-brgl@bgdev.pl> <20180207134553.13510-2-brgl@bgdev.pl> <36aebdca-2a7d-07a3-8632-95992d74cae6@lechnology.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <36aebdca-2a7d-07a3-8632-95992d74cae6-nq/r/kbU++upp/zk7JDF2g@public.gmane.org> Sender: devicetree-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: David Lechner Cc: Rob Herring , Mark Rutland , Sekhar Nori , Kevin Hilman , Russell King , devicetree , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux ARM , Bartosz Golaszewski List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org 2018-02-07 22:47 GMT+01:00 David Lechner : > On 02/07/2018 07:45 AM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: >> >> From: Bartosz Golaszewski >> >> Add a simple document for the DaVinci genpd driver. We use clock pm >> exclusively hence no reg property. >> >> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski >> --- >> .../devicetree/bindings/soc/ti,davinci-pm-domains.txt | 13 >> +++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+) >> create mode 100644 >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/ti,davinci-pm-domains.txt >> >> diff --git >> a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/ti,davinci-pm-domains.txt >> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/ti,davinci-pm-domains.txt >> new file mode 100644 >> index 000000000000..935d063c7b35 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/ti,davinci-pm-domains.txt >> @@ -0,0 +1,13 @@ >> +Device tree bindings for the genpd driver for Texas Instruments DaVinci >> SoCs >> + >> +Required properties: >> + >> +- compatible: must be "ti,davinci-pm-domains" >> +- #power-domain-cells: must be 0 >> + >> +Example: >> + >> +pwc1: power-controller@227000 { >> + compatible = "ti,davinci-pm-domains"; >> + #power-domain-cells = <0>; >> +}; >> > > > We already have the PSC @227000. Why not just add > #power-domain-cells = <0>; to that node instead of creating > a new "device" when this is really the same device? I thought about it too, but then noticed that most architectures do use a separate genpd driver even if it only calls routines placed in their respective clock driver. Let me prepare a v2 with this approach though. Thanks, Bartosz -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: brgl@bgdev.pl (Bartosz Golaszewski) Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2018 09:56:00 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 1/7] dt-bindings: soc: new driver for DaVinci genpd In-Reply-To: <36aebdca-2a7d-07a3-8632-95992d74cae6@lechnology.com> References: <20180207134553.13510-1-brgl@bgdev.pl> <20180207134553.13510-2-brgl@bgdev.pl> <36aebdca-2a7d-07a3-8632-95992d74cae6@lechnology.com> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org 2018-02-07 22:47 GMT+01:00 David Lechner : > On 02/07/2018 07:45 AM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: >> >> From: Bartosz Golaszewski >> >> Add a simple document for the DaVinci genpd driver. We use clock pm >> exclusively hence no reg property. >> >> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski >> --- >> .../devicetree/bindings/soc/ti,davinci-pm-domains.txt | 13 >> +++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+) >> create mode 100644 >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/ti,davinci-pm-domains.txt >> >> diff --git >> a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/ti,davinci-pm-domains.txt >> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/ti,davinci-pm-domains.txt >> new file mode 100644 >> index 000000000000..935d063c7b35 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/ti,davinci-pm-domains.txt >> @@ -0,0 +1,13 @@ >> +Device tree bindings for the genpd driver for Texas Instruments DaVinci >> SoCs >> + >> +Required properties: >> + >> +- compatible: must be "ti,davinci-pm-domains" >> +- #power-domain-cells: must be 0 >> + >> +Example: >> + >> +pwc1: power-controller at 227000 { >> + compatible = "ti,davinci-pm-domains"; >> + #power-domain-cells = <0>; >> +}; >> > > > We already have the PSC @227000. Why not just add > #power-domain-cells = <0>; to that node instead of creating > a new "device" when this is really the same device? I thought about it too, but then noticed that most architectures do use a separate genpd driver even if it only calls routines placed in their respective clock driver. Let me prepare a v2 with this approach though. Thanks, Bartosz