Hi Elaine,
Am Donnerstag, 18. Februar 2016, 11:07:15 schrieb Elaine Zhang:
> This patch adds support for making one power domain a sub-domain of
> other domain. This is useful for modeling power dependences,
> which needs to have more than one power domain enabled to be operational.
>
> Signed-off-by: Elaine Zhang <zhangqing at rock-chips.com>
> ---
> drivers/soc/rockchip/pm_domains.c | 54
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 54 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/soc/rockchip/pm_domains.c
> b/drivers/soc/rockchip/pm_domains.c index 350527b..8cdf1b2 100644
> --- a/drivers/soc/rockchip/pm_domains.c
> +++ b/drivers/soc/rockchip/pm_domains.c
> @@ -372,6 +372,54 @@ static void rockchip_configure_pd_cnt(struct
> rockchip_pmu *pmu, regmap_write(pmu->regmap, domain_reg_offset + 4,
> count);
> }
>
> +static int rockchip_pm_add_subdomain(struct rockchip_pmu *pmu,
> + struct device_node *parent)
> +{
> + struct device_node *np;
> + int error;
> +
> + for_each_child_of_node(parent, np) {
> + struct generic_pm_domain *child_domain, *parent_domain;
> + u32 idx = ~0;
> +
> + if (of_property_read_u32(parent, "reg", &idx)) {
> + dev_err(pmu->dev,
> + "%s: failed to retrieve domain id (reg)\n",
> + parent->name);
> + of_node_put(parent);
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> + parent_domain = pmu->genpd_data.domains[idx];
> +
> + error = rockchip_pm_add_one_domain(pmu, np);
> + if (error) {
> + dev_err(pmu->dev, "failed to handle node %s: %d\n",
> + np->name, error);
> + of_node_put(np);
> + return -ENODEV;
> + }
> +
> + if (of_property_read_u32(np, "reg", &idx)) {
> + dev_err(pmu->dev,
> + "%s: failed to retrieve domain id (reg)\n",
> + np->name);
> + of_node_put(np);
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> + child_domain = pmu->genpd_data.domains[idx];
> +
> + if (pm_genpd_add_subdomain(parent_domain, child_domain))
> + pr_warn("%s failed to add subdomain: %s\n",
> + parent_domain->name, child_domain->name);
should probably be dev_err here
> + else
> + pr_warn("%s add subdomain: %s\n",
> + parent_domain->name, child_domain->name);
you don't need pr_warn / dev_warn on sucess
> +
> + rockchip_pm_add_subdomain(pmu, np);
> + }
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
In general the code looks like you're going to group the domains
hirarchically, like
power: power-controller {
compatible = "rockchip,rk3399-power-controller";
pd_cci {
reg = <RK3399_PD_CCI>;
clocks = ...;
pd_cci0 {
reg = <RK3399_PD_CCI0>;
clocks = ...;
};
};
};
This isn't documented in the dt-binding and also isn't really improving
reading these declarations. Instead as I said before, I think I'd like more
get inspiration from how Exynos is doing that already (arch/arm/mach-
exynos/pm_domains.c at "Assign the child power domains to their parents")
simply declaring an additional power-domains property like:
power: power-controller {
compatible = "rockchip,rk3399-power-controller";
pd_cci {
reg = <RK3399_PD_CCI>;
clocks = ...;
};
pd_cci0 {
reg = <RK3399_PD_CCI0>;
clocks = ...;
power-domains = <&power RK3399_PD_CCI>;
};
};
> static int rockchip_pm_domain_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> {
> struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> @@ -437,6 +485,12 @@ static int rockchip_pm_domain_probe(struct
> platform_device *pdev) node->name, error);
> goto err_out;
> }
blank line here
> + error = rockchip_pm_add_subdomain(pmu, node);
> + if (error < 0) {
> + dev_err(dev, "failed to handle subdomain node %s: %d\n",
> + node->name, error);
> + goto err_out;
> + }
> }
>
> if (error) {
