From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: jonathanh@nvidia.com (Jon Hunter)
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 15:58:58 +0100
Subject: [RFC PATCH 1/8] PM / Domains: Add new helper functions for
 device-tree
In-Reply-To: <1457090634-14785-2-git-send-email-jonathanh@nvidia.com>
References: <1457090634-14785-1-git-send-email-jonathanh@nvidia.com>
 <1457090634-14785-2-git-send-email-jonathanh@nvidia.com>
Message-ID: <576AA7B2.5030004@nvidia.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

Hi Ulf,

On 04/03/16 11:23, Jon Hunter wrote:
> Ideally, if we are returning a reference to a PM domain via a call to
> of_genpd_get_from_provider(), then we should keep track of such
> references via a reference count. The reference count could then be used
> to determine if a PM domain can be safely removed. Alternatively, it is
> possible to avoid such external references by providing APIs to access
> the PM domain and hence, eliminate any calls to
> of_genpd_get_from_provider().
> 
> Add new helper functions for adding a device and a subdomain to a PM
> domain when using device-tree, so that external calls to
> of_genpd_get_from_provider() can be removed.

While we are at it, does it make sense to add helpers for
of_genpd_remove_device/subdomain() as well? Seems that these could be
useful for doing the inverse when cleaning up.

Cheers
Jon

-- 
nvpublic