Hello, On 2015-01-13 11:44, Ulf Hansson wrote:
On 13 January 2015 at 10:39, Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:This patch adds support for making one power domain a sub-domain of other domain. This is useful for modeling power dependences for devices like TV Mixer or Camera ISP, which needs to have more than one power domain enabled to be operational. Based on previous work by Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@xxxxxxxxxxx>. Signed-off-by: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@xxxxxxxxxxx> --- .../bindings/arm/exynos/power_domain.txt | 2 ++ arch/arm/mach-exynos/pm_domains.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 30 insertions(+) diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/exynos/power_domain.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/exynos/power_domain.txt index f4445e5..28918a9 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/exynos/power_domain.txt +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/exynos/power_domain.txt @@ -22,6 +22,8 @@ Optional Properties: - pclkN, clkN: Pairs of parent of input clock and input clock to the devices in this power domain. Maximum of 4 pairs (N = 0 to 3) are supported currently. +- power-domains: generic power domain binding pointing to a master power domain + that the given domain is a part ofI would prefer this to be documented as a generic way to configure power domain parents, in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/power_domain.txt.
Well, right now it is a specific feature of exynos power domains, however if you want I can add a note in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/power_domain.txt on defining child-parent relation. However it will be still up to the power domain
providers to implement support for it.
Node of a device using power domains must have a power-domains property defined with a phandle to respective power domain. diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/pm_domains.c b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/pm_domains.c index 20f2671..37266a8 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/pm_domains.c +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/pm_domains.c @@ -161,6 +161,34 @@ no_clk: of_genpd_add_provider_simple(np, &pd->pd); } + /* Assign the child power domains to their parents */ + for_each_compatible_node(np, NULL, "samsung,exynos4210-pd") { + struct generic_pm_domain *child_domain, *parent_domain; + struct of_phandle_args args; + + args.np = np; + args.args_count = 0; + child_domain = of_genpd_get_from_provider(&args); + if (!child_domain) + continue; + + if (of_parse_phandle_with_args(np, "power-domains", + "#power-domain-cells", 0, &args) != 0) + continue; + + parent_domain = of_genpd_get_from_provider(&args); + if (!parent_domain) + continue; + + if (pm_genpd_add_subdomain(parent_domain, child_domain)) + pr_warn("%s failed to add subdomain: %s\n", + parent_domain->name, child_domain->name); + else + pr_info("%s has as child subdomain: %s.\n", + parent_domain->name, child_domain->name); + of_node_put(np); + }How do you maintain the order of how domains are being initialized? For example, don't you need to initialize all "parents" prior their children?
All power domains, which have been added to the system were already initialized in the previous loop (executed before the added code). Once all 'exynos4210-pd' gets
initialized, they are scanned for child-parent relation.
+ return 0; } arch_initcall(exynos4_pm_init_power_domain); -- 1.9.2I noticed this patch wasn't sent to linux-arm, I guess it should?
Yes, I forgot about that. I will add it in the next version. Best regards -- Marek Szyprowski, PhD Samsung R&D Institute Poland -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
