On 10/08/16 19:09, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On 10/08/16 17:40, Lina Iyer wrote:
Hi Sudeep,
On Wed, Aug 10 2016 at 09:15 -0600, Sudeep Holla wrote:
Hi Lina,
I have few concerns mainly due to the lack of description and not the
binding per say.
[...]
+- domain-idle-states : A phandle of an idle-state that shall be
soaked into a
+ generic domain power state. The idle state
definitions are
+ compatible with arm,idle-state specified in [1].
+
So I assume these can be used for the genpd states. Either we rename
it domain-power-states or make it clear that these domain-idle-states
can also represent the power-states for normal devices.
These are the domains' idle states. These states are only used when the
domain goes into idle, not when the domain is active. These are not
power states that the domain can operate on either. Hence the idle-state
moniker.
I am not sure if we can tell that the device is running in all it's
power states. E.g. in ACPI IIUC, only D0 state represent running state,
while D{1,2,3} are power states which consume less power than D0/running
state. I think genpd is designed on those lines.
I didn't complete this section earlier.
Just to clarify we can label them as idle states or whatever. Strictly
speaking today even cpu-idle-states have power off state, so the term is
not important.
What I intended to say is that it should be able to describe even device
idle(power states minus the active running) states.
--
Regards,
Sudeep
--
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
