Thanks your reviewing!
On 2016年07月01日 05:57, Heiko Stuebner wrote:
Am Donnerstag, 30. Juni 2016, 14:49:41 schrieb Doug Anderson:
Caesar,
On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 6:56 PM, Caesar Wang <wxt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
From: Elaine Zhang <zhangqing@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
In order to meet low power requirements, a power management unit (PMU)
is
designed for controlling power resources in RK3399. The RK3399 PMU is
dedicated for managing the power of the whole chip.
1. add pd node for RK3399 Soc
2. create power domain tree
3. add qos node for domain
From the DT/binds and driver can get more detail information:
The driver:
drivers/soc/rockchip/pm_domains.c
The document:
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/rockchip/power_domain.txt
---
Tested on vop and gpu devices added for next kernel.
PD:
localhost / # cat sys/kernel/debug/pm_genpd/pm_genpd_summary
Nit: can you put a "/" before "sys" here and elsewhere in your patches?
domain status slaves
/device runtime status
----------------------------------------------------------------------
pd_gpu on
/devices/platform/ff9a0000.gpu active
pd_vopl off
/devices/platform/ff8f0000.vop suspended
pd_vopb off
/devices/platform/ff900000.vop suspended
pd_vo off pd_vopb, pd_vopl
pd_hdcp off
...
pd_iep off
pd_vcodec off
pd_vdu off
QOS:
localhost / # cat sys/kernel/debug/pm_qos/
cpu_dma_latency network_latency
memory_bandwidth network_throughput
What is this supposed to be showing exactly? You can't "cat" a
directory, so maybe you meant "ls"?
Also, each of these files contains the string "Empty!" and these files
seem fairly unconnected to your patch. Those files exist both before
and after your patch and nothing that I can see in the Rockchip QoS
stuff hooks up to the generic Linux QoS infrastructure. The power
domains just save and restore the QoS--they don't actually allow
settting it.
personally, I would just drop that debugfs-dump, as I don't see what we gain
from it :-).
Agreed, drop it.
Signed-off-by: Elaine Zhang <zhangqing@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <wxt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
[...]
+ pmu: power-management@ff310000 {
+ compatible = "rockchip,rk3399-pmu", "syscon",
"simple-mfd"; + reg = <0x0 0xff310000 0x0 0x1000>;
+
+ power: power-controller {
+ status = "okay";
+ compatible = "rockchip,rk3399-power-controller";
+ #power-domain-cells = <1>;
+ #address-cells = <1>;
+ #size-cells = <0>;
+
+ pd_vdu {
+ reg = <RK3399_PD_VDU>;
+ clocks = <&cru ACLK_VDU>,
+ <&cru HCLK_VDU>;
+ pm_qos = <&qos_video_m1_r>,
+ <&qos_video_m1_w>;
+ };
+ pd_vcodec {
+ reg = <RK3399_PD_VCODEC>;
+ clocks = <&cru ACLK_VCODEC>,
+ <&cru HCLK_VCODEC>;
+ pm_qos = <&qos_video_m0>;
+ };
+ pd_iep {
+ reg = <RK3399_PD_IEP>;
+ clocks = <&cru ACLK_IEP>,
+ <&cru HCLK_IEP>;
+ pm_qos = <&qos_iep>;
+ };
+ pd_rga {
+ reg = <RK3399_PD_RGA>;
+ clocks = <&cru ACLK_RGA>,
+ <&cru HCLK_RGA>;
+ pm_qos = <&qos_rga_r>,
+ <&qos_rga_w>;
+ };
+ pd_vio {
+ reg = <RK3399_PD_VIO>;
+ #address-cells = <1>;
+ #size-cells = <0>;
+
+ pd_isp0 {
+ reg = <RK3399_PD_ISP0>;
+ clocks = <&cru ACLK_ISP0>,
+ <&cru HCLK_ISP0>;
+ pm_qos = <&qos_isp0_m0>,
+ <&qos_isp0_m1>;
+ };
+ pd_isp1 {
+ reg = <RK3399_PD_ISP1>;
+ clocks = <&cru ACLK_ISP1>,
+ <&cru HCLK_ISP1>;
+ pm_qos = <&qos_isp1_m0>,
+ <&qos_isp1_m1>;
+ };
+ pd_hdcp {
+ reg = <RK3399_PD_HDCP>;
+ clocks = <&cru ACLK_HDCP>,
+ <&cru HCLK_HDCP>,
+ <&cru PCLK_HDCP>;
+ pm_qos = <&qos_hdcp>;
+ };
+ pd_vo {
+ reg = <RK3399_PD_VO>;
+ #address-cells = <1>;
+ #size-cells = <0>;
+
+ pd_vopb {
+ reg = <RK3399_PD_VOPB>;
+ clocks = <&cru
ACLK_VOP0>, +
<&cru HCLK_VOP0>; +
pm_qos = <&qos_vop_big_r>, +
<&qos_vop_big_w>; +
};
+ pd_vopl {
+ reg = <RK3399_PD_VOPL>;
+ clocks = <&cru
ACLK_VOP1>, +
<&cru HCLK_VOP1>; +
pm_qos = <&qos_vop_little>; + };
+ };
+ };
+ pd_gpu {
+ reg = <RK3399_PD_GPU>;
+ clocks = <&cru ACLK_GPU>;
+ pm_qos = <&qos_gpu>;
+ };
Again a nitty sort order question. Is there a reason not to make
things alphabetical? AKA: pd_gpu, pd_iep, pd_rga, ...
...and inside pd_vio should be alphabetical too?
In the TRM it looks like some of the power domains are grouped
together (like all the domains under LOGIC or CENTERLOGIC). If
keeping that grouping makes sense here then you should add a comment
at the start of each group and sort the groups sanely (and sort within
each group).
Okay, let me see it.
Thanks!
It looks like there are also more power domains that you haven't
listed here (like PD_GMAC, for instance, or PD_CORE_L). Are you
planning to add those in a followon patch?
that reminds me, nodes with a reg property should have the base address in
the node name as well. Using the constant works nicely, as can be seen on
the rk3288 where we have for example:
pd_vio@RK3288_PD_VIO
Agreed.
Heiko
--
caesar wang | software engineer | wxt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
--
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
