On 06/10/2021 16.05, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
+ IP cores belonging to a power domain should contain a
+ "power-domains" property that is a phandle for the
+ power domain node representing the domain.
Skip this last paragraph - it is obvious in usage of power domains.
Specific bindings should not duplicate generic knowledge.
Ack, I'll drop it.
+properties:
+ $nodename:
+ pattern: "^power-controller@[0-9a-f]+$"
Usually we call nodes as power-domain.
I had it as that originally, but these aren't power domains. These are
power management domains (they can clock *and* power gate separately,
where supported) plus also do reset management. So I wasn't sure if it
was really fair calling them "power-domain" at that point.
+ power-domains:
+ description:
+ Reference to parent power domains. A domain may have multiple parents,
+ and all will be powered up when it is powered.
How many items?
One or more (if there are none the property should not exist). I guess
that should be encoded.
+
+ apple,domain-name:
Use existing binding "label".
Ah, I'd missed that one! I'm glad there's an existing binding for this
already.
Your parent schema should include this one for evaluating children.
Yup, I'll do it like that for v2.
Thanks!
--
Hector Martin (marcan@xxxxxxxxx)
Public Key: https://mrcn.st/pub
