On Fri, Feb 26 2016 at 12:50 -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 02/12, Lina Iyer wrote:
@@ -101,6 +105,27 @@
};
};
+ CPU_PD: cpu-pd@0 {
+ #power-domain-cells = <0>;
+ power-states = <&CLUSTER_RET>, <&CLUSTER_PWR_DWN>;
Why isn't this part of the psci node? PSCI is the node that's
providing the code/logic for the power domain.
I like that idea too.
Lorenzo, what do you think?
+ };
+
+ pd-power-states {
+ CLUSTER_RET: power-state@1 {
+ state-param = <0x1000010>;
+ entry-latency-us = <500>;
+ exit-latency-us = <500>;
+ residency-us = <2000>;
+ };
+
+ CLUSTER_PWR_DWN: power-state@2 {
+ state-param = <0x1000030>;
+ entry-latency-us = <2000>;
+ exit-latency-us = <2000>;
+ residency-us = <6000>;
+ };
+ };
+
And I would expect these to be put somewhere inside the power
domain provider as well? Is this documented somewhere?
Not yet, they will be, when it is submitted. This the glue patch that I
use on top of Axel's series to read domain states from DT, instead of
defining with the driver.
I have to discuss with Ulf, as to who is submitting that patch.
Thanks,
Lina
psci {
compatible = "arm,psci-1.0";
method = "smc";
--
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
