On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 05:13:21PM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote: >On Wed, Dec 25, 2024 at 04:20:44PM +0800, Peng Fan (OSS) wrote: >> From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@xxxxxxx> >> >> Two drivers scmi_cpufreq.c and scmi_perf_domain.c both use >> SCMI_PROTCOL_PERF protocol, but with different name, so two scmi devices >> will be created. But the fwnode->dev could only point to one device. >> >> If scmi cpufreq device created earlier, the fwnode->dev will point to >> the scmi cpufreq device. Then the fw_devlink will link performance >> domain user device(consumer) to the scmi cpufreq device(supplier). >> But actually the performance domain user device, such as GPU, should use >> the scmi perf device as supplier. Also if 'cpufreq.off=1' in bootargs, >> the GPU driver will defer probe always, because of the scmi cpufreq >> device not ready. >> >> Because for cpufreq, no need use fw_devlink. So bypass setting fwnode >> for scmi cpufreq device. >> > >Not 100% sure if above is correct. See: > >Commit 8410e7f3b31e ("cpufreq: scmi: Fix OPP addition failure with a dummy clock provider") > >Am I missing something ? Could we update juno-scmi.dtsi to use ? &A53_0 { - clocks = <&scmi_dvfs 1>; + power-domains = <&scmi_perf x>; + power-domain-names = "perf"; }; Even for scmi-cpufreq.c that needs fw_devlink because of the clocks entry in juno-scmi.dtsi, there is no issue here. Because the dummy clock provider will always be ready before opp with your upper fix. So we could safetly ignore fw_devlink per my understanding. Regards, Peng > >-- >Regards, >Sudeep