On 08/01/2013 07:54 AM, Mark Rutland wrote: ... > We seem to be going over two cases, which both feel wrong to me: > > * One SoC used in multiple boards, where on some boards an OPP cannot be > used because some requirement is not met. In this case, the board's > dts (by including the SoC's dtsi) describes something that's not > necessarily usable, and we seem to have no way to describe in the OPP > table that the OPP is not usable for that board. There are probably a lot of examples of this already. For example, for pinctrl, people often want the SoC .dtsi file to include "pin configuration nodes" (see Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/pinctrl-bindings.txt) for many common pinmux configurations in the SoC .dtsi file, so that board files can simply refer to the already-existing nodes rather than having to write everything from scratch. Obviously, not all common configurations are used by every board. ... >> Are you suggesting we have OPP tables per board? > > Yes, for the reasons I give above. Common OPP tabless can easily be > factored into separate include files to allow for arbitrary composition. Using separate include files sounds like a reasonable idea. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cpufreq" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
