On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 7:47 AM, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Power-domains can also have their active states and this patch enhances > the OPP binding to define those. > > The power domains can use the OPP bindings mostly as is. Though there > are some changes required to support special cases: > > - Allow "operating-points-v2" to contain multiple phandles for power > domain providers providing multiple domains. > > - A new property "power-domain-opp" is added for devices to specify the > minimum required OPP of the master domain for the functioning of the > device. We can add this property directly to device's node if the > device has a fixed minimum OPP requirement from the master power > domain. Or we can add this property to each OPP node of the device, if > different OPP nodes have different minimum OPP requirement from the > master power domain. > > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/opp/opp.txt | 12 +++++ > .../devicetree/bindings/power/power_domain.txt | 62 ++++++++++++++++++++++ > 2 files changed, 74 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/opp/opp.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/opp/opp.txt > index 9d733af26be7..203e09fe7698 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/opp/opp.txt > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/opp/opp.txt > @@ -45,6 +45,11 @@ Devices supporting OPPs must set their "operating-points-v2" property with > phandle to a OPP table in their DT node. The OPP core will use this phandle to > find the operating points for the device. > > +This can contain more than one phandle for power domain providers that provide > +multiple power domains. That is, one phandle for each power domain. If only one > +phandle is available, then the same OPP table will be used for all power domains > +provided by the power domain provider. > + > If required, this can be extended for SoC vendor specific bindings. Such bindings > should be documented as Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/<vendor>-opp.txt > and should have a compatible description like: "operating-points-v2-<vendor>". > @@ -154,6 +159,13 @@ properties. > > - status: Marks the node enabled/disabled. > > +- power-domain-opp: This contains phandle to one of the OPP nodes of the master > + power domain. This specifies the minimum required OPP of the master domain for > + the functioning of the device in this OPP (where this property is present). > + This property can only be set for a device if the device node contains the > + "power-domains" property. Also, either all or none of the OPP nodes in an OPP > + table should have it set. This is a "this device requires OPP n" property. Couldn't we want this for cases other than a powerdomain OPP? What if a device has requirements 2 different OPPs? On the flipside, I don't think we want devices picking things like CPU OPPs and putting policy here. But I'd rather things be extendable than reviewing yet another OPP property next month. Rob -- 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
