On 22/01/2023 15:05, Christian Marangi wrote: > On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 02:57:07PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 21/01/2023 01:01, Christian Marangi wrote: >>> The qcom-cpufreq-nvmem driver also supports legacy devices pre-cpr that >>> doesn't have power-domains. When the schema was introduced, it was >>> wrongly set to always require these binding but this is not the case for >>> legacy device that base everything on nvmem cells and multiple microvolt >> >> What is a "legacy device"? Why do you adjust bindings to legacy device? >> Can't you just fix the DTS on these devices? >> > > With legacy I mean device where cpr (core power reduction) wasn't a > thing and qcom used a different way to select the microvolt for the opp. > > There is nothing in the related DTS to fix since they are not broken. > The driver doesn't enforce cpr presence and supports both new and old > implementation... > > Setting the cpr as a required binding was wrong from the start. It was > probably done when qcs404 was introduced and they had this bright idea > of creating the schema and ignoring the other kind of configuration the > driver supports. > > Since now we want to send opp for ipq8064 that use the old > implementation this fixup is required. > > Probably I should drop the legacy term and just say that the driver > supports 2 different configuration and the following schema permits only > one? Yes, it would be clearer. Best regards, Krzysztof
