On 05/19/15 19:07, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 19-05-15, 17:51, Stephen Boyd wrote: > >> Also I wonder if all properties should be optional? I don't have this >> scenario today, but perhaps the frequencies could be encoded in fuses, >> but the voltages wouldn't be and so we might want to read out the >> frequencies for a fixed set of voltages. Of course, if there's nothing >> in the OPP node at all, it's not very useful, so perhaps some statement >> that at least one of the frequency/voltage/amperage properties should be >> present. > I am not sure. What we are trying to do (fill partially in DT and > partially in platform), is a trick and not the right use of bindings. > > Ideally whatever is passed in DT should be complete by itself and > doesn't require platform to tweak it (which it can't). For example, > the cpufreq-dt driver will try to initialize OPPs from the DT directly > and wouldn't know about the platform tweaks. That can work eventually > as platform will add OPPs for the same bindings before cpufreq driver > will try to do, but that's a trick. > > And then its all about frequency in the first place, and so marking > that optional looks wrong. Probably not the right use of these > bindings. Ok then I won't be using these bindings on any of the new platforms I have where half the data is in one place, and half in another. But for some of Krait based platforms I have they should be useable. -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project -- 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
