On 14 April 2015 at 15:12, Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > msm8974 has gcc and mmcc nodes, and apq8084 has a gcc node which > implement gdsc powerdomains. Add the #power-domain-cells property > to them. > > Signed-off-by: Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-apq8084.dtsi | 1 + > arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-msm8974.dtsi | 2 ++ > 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-apq8084.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-apq8084.dtsi > index 1f130bc..55c281c 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-apq8084.dtsi > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-apq8084.dtsi > @@ -183,6 +183,7 @@ > compatible = "qcom,gcc-apq8084"; > #clock-cells = <1>; > #reset-cells = <1>; > + #power-domain-cells = <1>; So the PM domain will be apart of the clock-controller. That's a bit odd, but I guess the hardware is like that!? Anyway, what I fail to understand from this patchset is who will be the actual consumer of the PM domain? In other words, what devices will hold the below property in its DT node? power_domains = <phandle index>; This is needed for genpd to have the device at probe time, attached to its PM domain. > reg = <0xfc400000 0x4000>; > }; > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-msm8974.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-msm8974.dtsi > index e265ec1..6184d32 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-msm8974.dtsi > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-msm8974.dtsi > @@ -179,6 +179,7 @@ > compatible = "qcom,gcc-msm8974"; > #clock-cells = <1>; > #reset-cells = <1>; > + #power-domain-cells = <1>; > reg = <0xfc400000 0x4000>; > }; > > @@ -186,6 +187,7 @@ > compatible = "qcom,mmcc-msm8974"; > #clock-cells = <1>; > #reset-cells = <1>; > + #power-domain-cells = <1>; > reg = <0xfd8c0000 0x6000>; > }; > Kind regards Uffe -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
