From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1031116AbbJ3VtM (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Oct 2015 17:49:12 -0400 Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:49489 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030984AbbJ3VtJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Oct 2015 17:49:09 -0400 Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 14:49:07 -0700 From: Stephen Boyd To: Viresh Kumar Cc: Rafael Wysocki , robh+dt@kernel.org, lee.jones@linaro.org, linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, pawel.moll@arm.com, ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk, galak@codeaurora.org, nm@ti.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, open list , "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] PM / OPP: Add "opp-supported-hw" binding Message-ID: <20151030214907.GJ19782@codeaurora.org> References: <2d52388bd7d3cc546ac3ab5afeb47bfcb3012213.1446167359.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2d52388bd7d3cc546ac3ab5afeb47bfcb3012213.1446167359.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 10/30, Viresh Kumar wrote: > +- opp-supported-hw: User defined array containing a hierarchy of hardware > + version numbers, supported by the OPP. For example: a platform with hierarchy > + of three levels of versions (A, B and C), this field should be like , > + where X corresponds to Version hierarchy A, Y corresponds to version hierarchy > + B and Z corresponds to version hierarchy C. > + > + Each level of hierarchy is represented by a 32 bit value, and so there can be > + only 32 different supported version per hierarchy. i.e. 1 bit per version. A > + value of 0xFFFFFFFF will enable the OPP for all versions for that hierarchy > + level. And a value of 0x00000000 will disable the OPP completely, and so we > + never want that to happen. I suppose if you wanted to have 64 possible combinations of some attribute you would just extend it to two 32 bit numbers in sequence? I don't see the limitation here, and hopefully there isn't a limitation so that we can specify sufficiently large numbers with more bits if we need to. -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project