On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 04:23:52PM +0100, Ulf Hansson wrote: > On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 at 23:35, Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Dec 13, 2024 at 09:30:01AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > > On 12-12-24, 13:01, Ulf Hansson wrote: > > > > On Fri, 6 Dec 2024 at 22:16, Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Hmm, it looks like this needs to be moved and possibly split up. > > > > > > > > The provider part (for the clock and power-domain) belongs in > > > > /drivers/pmdomain/*, along with the other power-domain providers. > > > > > > > > Other than that, I was really expecting the cpufreq-dt to take care of the rest. > > > > > > > > To me, the above code belongs in a power-domain provider driver. While > > > > the below should be taken care of in cpufreq-dt, except for the device > > > > registration of the cpufreq-dt device, I guess. > > > > > > > > Viresh, what's your view on this? > > > > > > Sure, no issues.. These are all cpufreq related, but don't necessarily belong in > > > the cpufreq directory. > > > > > > > Problem is really DT schema... I wonder if it's acceptable to push a > > name-only driver in pmdomain just do detach from cpufreq. The cpufreq > > driver would manually probe the pmdomain. Is it acceptable? > > > > Or do you have alternative solution for this? > > The power-domain provider driver should use the compatible > "airoha,en7581-cpufreq". This driver should be responsible for > registering the genpd and the clock. Is it ok to have clk provider in power-domain driver? > > Potentially, the power-domain provider driver could also register the > "cpufreq-dt" platform-device. To make this work, we also need to > extend the cpufreq-dt driver (maybe extend its platform-data too?) to > be capable of attaching the corresponding cpu-devices to their > power(perf)-domains. For the moment, this isn't supported, but I think > it would be nice if it could. Another option, would be to use an > additional separate name-based cpufreq-driver, as in the > qcom-cpufreq-nvmem.c, that then becomes responsible for registering > the cpufreq-dt device. Well a simple init/exit driver should be ok, we still need to have the custom function for opp so a specific driver in cpufreq is needed anyway. > > Viresh, do you have a better approach in mind? > If both are ok with this approach I will: - move pm domain and clock to pmdomain driver directory - rework the cpufreq driver to an init/exit implementation (no compatible) and just register cpufreq-dt with the custom opp OPs. This should work and make everything well organized. -- Ansuel
