On 11/03, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 30-10-15, 15:18, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > A side-note. I wonder if it would be better style to have the
> > node name be:
> >
> > opp@600000000 {
> >
> > At least it seems that the assumption is we can store all the
> > possible combinations of OPP values for a particular frequency in
> > the same node. Following this style would make dt compilation
> > fail if two nodes have the same frequency.
>
> From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2015 07:51:09 +0530
> Subject: [PATCH] PM / OPP: Rename OPP nodes as opp@<opp-hz>
>
> It would be better to name OPP nodes as opp@<opp-hz> as that will ensure
> that multiple DT nodes don't contain the same frequency. Of course we
> expect the writer to name the node with its opp-hz frequency and not any
> other frequency.
>
> And that will let the compile error out if multiple nodes are using the
> same opp-hz frequency.
>
> Suggested-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
