On 23/11/2023 11:49, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
On 11/22/23 21:55, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
On 22/11/2023 19:55, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
On 11/18/23 13:11, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
Right now we use fixed indexes to assign power-domains, with a
requirement for the TOP GDSC to come last in the list.
Adding support for named power-domains means the declaration in the
dtsi
can come in any order.
After this change we continue to support the old indexing - if a SoC
resource declaration or the in-use dtb doesn't declare power-domain
names
we fall back to the default legacy indexing.
From this point on though new SoC additions should contain named
power-domains, eventually we will drop support for legacy indexing.
Tested-by: Matti Lehtimäki <matti.lehtimaki@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
So, this commit should be a NOP within this series?
res->pd_name isn't defined anywhere afaics
Konrad
This series is mergeable though the linux-media tree standalone, yes.
Once merged, the dtsi change given in the cover letter will be submitted.
What I meant to say is that something similar to [1] is missing to
make use of the infra introduced with this patch.
Konrad
[1]
https://git.codelinaro.org/bryan.odonoghue/kernel/-/commit/f43942091c01c1f263a6e7adbcd0ed8ce723a303
Yeah, to be honest I debated with myself whether or not to include that
patch since once defined the code here will execute looking for named pd.
I'm not opposed to sending a v6 to include this additional change
though, I've thoroughly tested on rb5.
---
bod
