On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:42:32AM +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 01:31:48PM +0000, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 11:16:46AM +0000, Vincent Guittot wrote: > > > > > + - psci-power-state > > > > + Usage: Required if entry-method property value is set to > > > > + "psci". > > > > + Value type: <u32> > > > > + Definition: power_state parameter to pass to the PSCI > > > > + suspend call to enter the C-state. > > > > Why psci has got a dedicated field and not vendor methods ? can't you > > > make that more generic ? > > > If anyone provides me with an example usage why not, for now I know I > > need that parameter for PSCI, I can call it differently, define it for PSCI > > and leave it as optional for other methods. > > Would it not be sensible to define a PSCI binding that extends this and > other bindings - ISTR some other properties getting scattered into > bindings for it? You mean adding the properties in the PSCI bindings instead of defining them here ? Let me think about this, I really reckon these are C-state specific properties that belong in here (but actually I have to add a statement related to PSCI - ie bindings require a PSCI node to be present and valid), I will look into this. Thank you, Lorenzo -- 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
