On 19.02.2014 15:38, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Wednesday 19 February 2014, Philipp Zabel wrote:
Am Dienstag, den 18.02.2014, 19:10 +0100 schrieb Arnd Bergmann:
On Tuesday 18 February 2014 16:34:41 Philipp Zabel wrote:
+
+Example of a device that is part of a power domain:
+
+ vpu: vpu@02040000 {
+ reg = <0x02040000 0x3c000>;
+ /* ... */
+ fsl,power-domain = <&pd_pu>;
+ /* ... */
+ };
+
I'm really not too happy about platforms starting to add random
bindings for power domains. Unfortunately I didn't catch exynos
doing this first, but I don't want to see another platform like
that.
Can we please come up with a proper generic power domain binding
first and then add platform specific users?
what is the process here? I've seen the samsung bindings and copied the
pattern. I guess the Exynos bindings are set in stone, and the i.MX
power domains can be handled using the same bindings.
* First of all, get the pm domain maintainers into the loop, then make
sure all other users of pm domains are aware of what you are doing.
* Come up with a way to describe a pm_domain in a sufficiently generic
way. It's possible you just need a phandle, but experience on other
subsystems suggests that it helps to allow arguments, as we do for
clocks, dmas, mailboxes, etc.
* Draft a generic binding that can work on all platforms
* Implement support for the generic binding in the platform independent
code.
* Add a specific binding for your hardware.
* Implement support for your hardware binding on top of the generic
code.
* Get everyone involved to Ack the generic binding and implementation.
Arnd
Just wanted to share a link with you. ;)
http://www.spinics.net/lists/devicetree/msg18051.html
Best regards,
Tomasz
--
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
