Re: [RFC V1 0/8] CPUFreq: create platform-dev for DT based cpufreq drivers

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

 






On 01/12/14 13:29, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 1 December 2014 at 18:24, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
Thanks a lot for working on this, we really need to figure it out one day!

:)

Your patches seem well-implemented, so if everybody thinks the general
approach is the best solution, we should do that. From my point of view,
there are two things I would do differently:

- In the DT binding, I would strongly prefer anything but the root compatible
   property as the key for the new platforms. Clearly we have to keep using
   it for the backwards-compatibility case, as you do, but I think there
   are more appropriate places to put it. Sorting from most favorite to least
   favorite, my list would be:
         1. a new property in /cpus/
         2. a new property each /cpus/cpu@... node.

I did it this way earlier and named it dvfs-method but probably putting this
into the /cpus/ node is far better. But then Sudeep asked to utilize
compatible property only..

Are you fine with the name here? "dvfs-method"


That's right, I don't like driver specific method in the cpu node as you
initially did. But if it's a property in the chosen node (where we
usually put the Linux specific properties), I am fine with
that as Arnd has illustrated in his patch.

Regards,
Sudeep

--
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




[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