Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] arm64: dts: sdm845: Add gpu and gmu device nodes

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi,

On Sun, Dec 16, 2018 at 11:06 PM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> +Rob +Stephen,
>
> On 14-12-18, 09:04, Doug Anderson wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 8:41 PM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 12-12-18, 14:18, Jordan Crouse wrote:
> > > > +                     gpu_opp_table: opp-table {
> > > > +                             compatible = "operating-points-v2-qcom-level";
> > >
> > > I think you need to mention "operating-points-v2" as well here.
> >
> > Are you saying the above should be:
> >   compatible = "operating-points-v2-qcom-level", "operating-points-v2";
> >
> > If so I'm not sure I agree.
>
> Well I have my doubts as well on this. This is where the ordering was discussed
> earlier:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/152328979897.180276.15963925877442657158@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
>
> @Rob/Stephen: Should the opp-table node above also have "operating-points-v2"
> string in the compatible property ?
>
> > It's _not_ really compatible with the
> > "operating-points-v2" binding.  If you had a driver that had never
> > heard of "operating-points-v2-qcom-level" and had only heard of
> > "operating-points-v2" and it took a look at this node it would have no
> > idea what to do with it.
>
> Well it will parse everything apart from the qcom,level thing, so it can
> actually parse stuff here.
>
> > I'll also note that other instances posted to the list don't list both:
> >
> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10725801/ - RPM / RPMH PD bindings
> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10725793/ - RPMH PD device tree for sdm845
> >
> > The bindings patch also makes no mention of needing
> > "operating-points-v2".  I think the common case when a fallback is
> > required it is explicitly called out in the bindings:
> >
> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10725803/ - qcom-opp bindings
>
> Sure, maybe I am wrong but its better to get some clarity on it from Rob/Stephen.

In case it helps:

https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20181217210849.GA15490@bogus

...shows Rob giving a Reviewed-by with just

  compatible = "operating-points-v2-qcom-level";

...and not:

  compatible = "operating-points-v2-qcom-level", "operating-points-v2";


-Doug



[Index of Archives]     [Device Tree Compilter]     [Device Tree Spec]     [Linux Driver Backports]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux PCI Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Yosemite Backpacking]


  Powered by Linux