On Wed, 19 Jul 2023 at 17:17, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 04:17:35PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote: > > The protocol@13 node is describing the performance scaling option for the > > ARM SCMI interface, as a clock provider. This is unnecessary limiting, as > > performance scaling is in many cases not limited to switching a clock's > > frequency. > > > > Therefore, let's extend the binding so the interface can be modelled as a > > generic performance domaintoo. The common way to describe this, is to use > > the "power-domain" DT bindings, so let's use that. > > > > One thing I forgot to ask earlier is how we can manage different domain IDs > for perf and power domains which is the case with current SCMI platforms as > the spec never mandated or can ever mandate the perf and power domains IDs > to match. They need not be same anyways. Based upon what you describe above, I have modelled the perf-domain and the power-domain as two separate power-domain providers. A consumer device being hooked up to both domains, would specify the domain IDs in the second power-domain-cell, along the lines of the below. Then we would use power-domain-names to specify what each power-domain represents. power-domains = <&scmi_pd 2>, <&scmi_dvfs 4>; power-domain-names = "power", "perf"; I hope this makes it clearer!? Kind regards Uffe
