On Sunday 20 July 2014 08:07 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 19 July 2014 20:54, Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@xxxxxx> wrote: >> Sorry for jumping late > > No, you aren't late. Its just 2 days old thread :) > >> but one of the point I was raising as part of your >> other series was to extend the CPU topology bindings to cover the voltage >> domain information which is probably what is really needed to let the >> CPUfreq extract the information. Not sure if it was already discussed. > > Not it wasn't. > >> After all the CPU clocks, cluster, clock-gating, power domains are pretty much >> related. So instead of having new binding for CPUFreq, I was wondering whether >> we can extend the CPU topology binding information to include missing information. >> Scheduler work anyway needs that information. >> >> Ref: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/topology.txt >> >> Does that make sense ? > > Yeah it does, but I am not sure what exactly the bindings should look then. > So, the most basic step could be moving the new bindings to topology.txt > and name clock-master to dvfs-master. > > What else? > > If its going to be much controversial then we *can* go for just dvfs bindings > for now and then update them later. > Would be good to get others opinion. As you said if it is controversial then it will stall the development. Regards, Santosh -- 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
