I had a long chat with Rajendra offline and clarified few things.. On 08-05-17, 11:06, Rajendra Nayak wrote: > On 05/08/2017 09:45 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > On 06-05-17, 11:58, Kevin Hilman wrote: > >> I had the same question. Seems the same comment about an abstract > >> "index" is needed for voltage also. > > > > Why should we do that? Here are the cases that I had in mind while writing this: > > > > - DT only contains the performance-index and nothing else (i.e. voltages aren't > > exposed). > > > > We wouldn't be required to fill the microvolt property as it is optional. > > So the performance-index is specified in opp-hz property? Yes, but in the OPP table of the power-domain and not the device. The device can still have its own OPP table with normal freq/voltage values (for a separate regulator). > What if the microcontroller firmware maps the performance-index to voltage but > expects linux to scale the frequency? As you clarified on the chat, you were talking about the device here. It isn't a problem as we will have two separate tables here, one for the device and one for the domain. -- 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
