Hello Rajendra, On 05/30/2018 03:14 AM, Rajendra Nayak wrote: > On 05/30/2018 02:47 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote: >> On 25 May 2018 at 12:01, Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: ... >>> + pm_genpd_init(&rpmpds[i]->pd, NULL, true); >> >> Question: Is there no hierarchical topology of the PM domains. No >> genpd subdomains? > > The hierarchy if any is all handled by the remote core (RPM in this case). > For Linux its just a flat view. There is one special case that we'll need to handle somehow. The APPS vlvl request for VDD_MX needs to be greater than or equal to the vlvl request for VDD_CX. Can you please add the necessary code to achieve this? RPMh hardware doesn't handle this hardware requirement due to concerns about modem use case latency. Please note that this is handled in a somewhat hacky manner [1] with the downstream rpmh-regulator driver by specifying VDD_MX as the parent of VDD_CX and VDD_MX_AO as the parent of VDD_CX_AO with a dropout voltage of -1. That way, enabling CX causes MX to be enabled and voltage level requests are propagated from CX to MX (the -1 is ignored because it is rounded up within the sparse vlvl numbering space). Thanks, David [1]: https://source.codeaurora.org/quic/la/kernel/msm-4.9/tree/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845-regulator.dtsi?h=msm-4.9#n135 -- The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project -- 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
