On 07-09-16, 09:36, Dave Gerlach wrote: > On 09/07/2016 12:12 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: > >On 31-08-16, 21:53, Dave Gerlach wrote: > >>+In 'operating-points-v2' table: > >>+- compatible: Should be > >>+ - 'operating-points-v2-ti-am3352-cpu' for am335x SoCs > >>+ - 'operating-points-v2-ti-am4372-cpu' for am43xx SoCs > >>+ - 'operating-points-v2-ti-dra7-cpu' for dra7xx/am57xx SoCs > > > >Why do you need SoC specific compatible here? Are you defining new > >fields in OPP tables for your SoC ? How are the tables for your case > >going to differ from the ones using "operating-points-v2" compatible > >string? > > > > I thought you had suggested that I do this in your comments from v1, but I > guess that was dependent on whether or not I put the properties I have > inserted into the cpu node into the operating-points table instead. Yes. > I still > have gotten no comments from any DT maintainers so I left it as is. I am > still not sure if that is acceptable. @Rob: Can you please share your views on the new properties being added to the CPU node ? -- viresh -- 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
