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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3269BC43334 for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2022 20:48:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1345717AbiFOUs3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Jun 2022 16:48:29 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:43456 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1346327AbiFOUs1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Jun 2022 16:48:27 -0400 Received: from mail-pg1-x535.google.com (mail-pg1-x535.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::535]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D18DC54F97 for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2022 13:48:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pg1-x535.google.com with SMTP id f65so12431324pgc.7 for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2022 13:48:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject:content-language:to :cc:references:from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=c6+/MuYjgyn2udQAyYO1pcnAtH6vCX68BZVqdL6DnAM=; b=cJX06OPiClEPKrxTiXas7HB6WtJRm9cySIHWVKh7Ki7j3H9kK2AFdp8Q1FguyRd58x PaH1GoWdRDWmWvYK9aq02GYuLKlyPzPCiC/A0hNAHqw7XoGK2cbIiqa5oZeG98GmK33G UvBGwf064e/kjFJVo8x/gssDvQGs6OtC4xZmpdY5EjSujvGQnLOhOe75SGsnbn6onlRZ vCGCrcmmmIxGQ9v42+lPxCFsATzzGwavFuWZ2Q82aqm5WNb790TbSc1A6Y9wo3QK/QYf 19tRPPJ/Ai6gLmB9FsTwmcKiy6kaFR+c7wJs2RyhK8Ehe2mSkB/wRHeqe5IOAr3jotKW fPMQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:cc:references:from:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=c6+/MuYjgyn2udQAyYO1pcnAtH6vCX68BZVqdL6DnAM=; b=NVKnDw1pX0QfSMqNFWUj9KfukvuFfW88p+qaT/2E6i5nqrbhYqy17ZAfrZnmM8R80M zL+J2ltjysSmwXF51ZezPSCeVQBEWuFzL+Q3+mzNi30lXBHWLc+Cz0rktUe69lwGxRJl 0SsJ+LSYgFlfihuYBLuHZjELVWUlGdTJqcC4CIiU2g9wub2er+2PPZLaNsUew5sMMTBm 5gK4hKoFlmrm/RTNHs2ZwE2vruewGNrbp9FlSU6xh6hL7IYl7L8hd3i9AWwE0LMMOL+2 yTbOPawVYjl5c4aIBjBiMvFi0QaS9WQ0evoJ8hSieeJZE+N+0HCaTdrR1ZlYhmBvitdn wzIg== X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora+Ca7LqFjhTId0D8U+fUSm+iBCHoEmP7joXVdWIIDwtnMc2aFwK GQBLhE4WIOSiwtmKZiyegrQnJQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1vxUFh649IvXZavkwFGw+qBXaVL9n4KDXt80qmiBlcu4flgIbvfKkajNW5wqADIULcUT58ZmA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:26cf:b0:4f6:fc52:7b6a with SMTP id p15-20020a056a0026cf00b004f6fc527b6amr1389852pfw.39.1655326103240; Wed, 15 Jun 2022 13:48:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.22.33.138] ([192.77.111.2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p18-20020a17090a931200b001e8875e3326sm2225563pjo.47.2022.06.15.13.48.21 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 15 Jun 2022 13:48:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2022 13:48:20 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.10.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/5] power: domain: Add driver for a PM domain provider which controls Content-Language: en-US To: Marcel Ziswiler , "max.oss.09@gmail.com" , "geert@linux-m68k.org" Cc: "linux-imx@nxp.com" , "broonie@kernel.org" , Francesco Dolcini , "robh@kernel.org" , "krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org" , "ulf.hansson@linaro.org" , "biju.das.jz@bp.renesas.com" , "bjorn.andersson@linaro.org" , "catalin.marinas@arm.com" , "dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org" , "shawnguo@kernel.org" , "vkoul@kernel.org" , "geert+renesas@glider.be" , "kernel@pengutronix.de" , "khilman@kernel.org" , "s.hauer@pengutronix.de" , Andrejs Cainikovs , "will@kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , "rafael@kernel.org" , "festevam@gmail.com" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , Max Krummenacher References: <20220609150851.23084-1-max.oss.09@gmail.com> <20220613191549.GA4092455-robh@kernel.org> <12e3bb72-af2d-653f-b342-c6b4d6a1f292@linaro.org> <8decc5b6d1f0bc028d60d444d939da4408e756d3.camel@toradex.com> From: Krzysztof Kozlowski In-Reply-To: <8decc5b6d1f0bc028d60d444d939da4408e756d3.camel@toradex.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org On 15/06/2022 11:13, Marcel Ziswiler wrote: > On Wed, 2022-06-15 at 10:37 -0700, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 15/06/2022 10:31, Marcel Ziswiler wrote: >>> Hi >>> >>> On Wed, 2022-06-15 at 10:15 -0700, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>> On 15/06/2022 09:10, Max Krummenacher wrote: >>>>> Hi >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 9:22 AM Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi Rob, >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 9:15 PM Rob Herring wrote: >>>>>>> On Thu, Jun 09, 2022 at 05:08:46PM +0200, Max Krummenacher wrote: >>>>>>>> From: Max Krummenacher >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> its power enable by using a regulator. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The currently implemented PM domain providers are all specific to >>>>>>>> a particular system on chip. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yes, power domains tend to be specific to an SoC... 'power-domains' is >>>>>>> supposed to be power islands in a chip. Linux 'PM domains' can be >>>>>>> anything... >>>>> >>>>> I don't see why such power islands should be restricted to a SoC. You can >>>>> build the exact same idea on a PCB or even more modular designs. >>>> >>>> In the SoC these power islands are more-or-less defined. These are real >>>> regions gated by some control knob. >>>> >>>> Calling few devices on a board "power domain" does not make it a power >>>> domain. There is no grouping, there is no control knob. >>>> >>>> Aren't you now re-implementing regulator supplies? How is this different >>>> than existing supplies? >>> >>> I believe the biggest difference between power-domains and regulator-supplies lays in the former being >>> driver >>> agnostic while the later is driver specific. >> >> That's one way to look, but the other way (matching the bindings >> purpose) is to look at hardware. You have physical wire / voltage rail >> supply - use regulator supply. In the terms of the hardware - what is >> that power domain? It's a concept, not a physical object. > > Well, but how can that concept then exist within the SoC but not outside? I don't get it. Isn't it just the > exact same physical power gating thingy whether inside the SoC or on a PCB? > >>> Meaning with power-domains one can just add such arbitrary >>> structure to the device tree without any further driver specific changes/handling required. While with >>> regulator-supplies each and every driver actually needs to have driver specific handling thereof added. Or >>> do I >>> miss anything? >> >> Thanks for clarification but I am not sure if it matches the purpose of >> bindings and DTS. You can change the implementation as well to have >> implicit regulators. No need for new bindings for that. > > Okay, maybe that would also work, of course. So basically add a new binding That I did not propose. :) We have a binding for regulator supplies so you do no need a new one. > which allows adding regulators to > arbitrary nodes which then will be generically handled by e.g. runtime PM. Almost something like assigned- > clocks [1] you mean? I guess that could work. Remember that's why Max posted it as an RFC to get such feedback. > Thanks for further refining those ideas. DTS and bindings describe here the hardware, so focus on that. Device is supplied by some regulator which I assume can be controlled by GPIO. I don't think you need new bindings for that. Implementation of bindings, so Linux driver, is different thing. > >>> We are really trying to model something where a single GPIO pin (via a GPIO regulator or whatever) can >>> control >>> power to a variety of on-board peripherals. And, of course, we envision runtime PM actually making use of >>> it >>> e.g. when doing suspend/resume. >> >> And this GPIO pin controls what? Some power switch which cuts the power >> of one regulator or many? > > Well, that doesn't really matter. Resp. this part one should be able to sufficiently model using whatever > available regulator lore we already have (e.g. whatever delays/times). > >> If many different regulators, how do you >> handle small differences in ramp up time? > > Well, I don't think this is any different to any other regulator(s), not? Them HW folks will just need to tell > us some reasonable numbers for those delays/times. Probably... I just wonder how that would work in practice. Best regards, Krzysztof