On 12/29/2018 6:59 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
So I am guessing the conclusion is to use a fallback "operating-points-v2"
compatible*only* when we do have opp-hz along with qcom,level (as in the
case with gpu) and not have a fallback compatible in cases when we don't
have opp-hz (as in the case of rpm power domains)?
That seems a little inconsistent, and given Rob said either way is fine,
just do one way or the other and not both, I am inclined to think we should
just have a "operating-points-v2-qcom-level" and no fallback compatible.
Does that make sense?
Are you going to update the skip table to not create platform devices?
Or introduce some generic property to indicate that this is just data
and not a device node?
Is any of it really needed, given the bindings specify that the OPP table
should actually be a child node of the device/power domain supporting
it? I don't see who would end up creating platform devices for them.
