Hello Ulf, Thanks for the review! On 10/17/2019 05:04 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote: > On Wed, 16 Oct 2019 at 21:37, Thara Gopinath <thara.gopinath@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> RPMh power controller hosts mx domain that can be used as thermal >> warming device. Add a sub-node to specify this. >> >> Signed-off-by: Thara Gopinath <thara.gopinath@xxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt | 10 ++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt >> index eb35b22..fff695d 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt >> @@ -18,6 +18,16 @@ Required Properties: >> Refer to <dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h> for the level values for >> various OPPs for different platforms as well as Power domain indexes >> >> += SUBNODES >> +RPMh alsp hosts power domains that can behave as thermal warming device. >> +These are expressed as subnodes of the RPMh. The name of the node is used >> +to identify the power domain and must therefor be "mx". >> + >> +- #cooling-cells: >> + Usage: optional >> + Value type: <u32> >> + Definition: must be 2 >> + > > Just wanted to express a minor thought about this. In general we use > subnodes of PM domain providers to represent the topology of PM > domains (subdomains), this is something different, which I guess is > fine. > > I assume the #cooling-cells is here tells us this is not a PM domain > provider, but a "cooling device provider"? Yep. > > Also, I wonder if it would be fine to specify "power-domains" here, > rather than using "name" as I think that is kind of awkward!? Do you mean "power-domain-names" ? I am using this to match against the genpd names defined in the provider driver. Warm Regards Thara
