Hi Ulf,
On 13/03/17 11:45, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> +Björn
>
> On 13 March 2017 at 10:37, Jon Hunter <jonathanh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Hi Rafael, Kevin, Ulf,
>>
>> Looks like there is still some interest/needs in/for this. Any thoughts
>> on how we can move this forward?
>
> At the Linaro Connect last week, I was talking to Björn, Rajendra and
> Stephen more about these related issues.
>
> It definitely seems like we need to progress with this somehow,
> meaning we need a solution for being able to associate a device with
> more than one PM domain. In that context, I don't think genpd based on
> its current design, is a good fit to solve the problem.
>
> Instead I think we need something entirely new (perhaps some code can
> be borrowed from genpd), which is more similar to the clock/regulator
> framework. In other words, what you also were suggesting in a earlier
> reply.
> In this way, the driver/subsystem gains full flexibility of managing
> its device's PM domains, which seems like the best future-proof
> solution.
I agree, I think that that would give us the most flexibility to handle
whatever scenario. However, I was thinking that we could still use the
genpd core to register pm-domains with and control. My thought was to
allow devices to have a bindings with multiple pm-domains ...
dev-xyz {
...
power-domains = <&domain-a>, <&domain-b>;
};
Then in the genpd core we do having something like ...
diff --git a/drivers/base/power/domain.c b/drivers/base/power/domain.c
index e697dec9d25b..d1ae6ddf4903 100644
--- a/drivers/base/power/domain.c
+++ b/drivers/base/power/domain.c
@@ -2026,6 +2026,15 @@ int genpd_dev_pm_attach(struct device *dev)
"samsung,power-domain", 0);
if (!pd_args.np)
return -ENOENT;
+ } else if (ret > 1) {
+ /*
+ * If there are more than one PM domain defined for a device,
+ * then these need to be manually controlled by the device
+ * driver because the genpd core cannot bind a device with
+ * more than one PM domain.
+ */
+ dev_dbg(dev, "cannot add PM domains, %d detected!\n", ret);
+ return 0;
}
Then add some new public APIs for getting and controlling the pm-domains ...
struct generic_pm_domain *pm_genpd_get(struct device *dev, char *name);
- Use 'dev->of_node' to look-up pm-domain if populated, else uses name.
struct generic_pm_domain *of_pm_genpd_get(struct device *dev, int index);
void pm_genpd_put(struct generic_pm_domain *pd);
int pm_genpd_power_on(struct generic_pm_domain *pd);
int pm_genpd_power_off(struct generic_pm_domain *pd);
- Power on/off APIs would be synchronous types
Are there any potential pitfalls of the above?
Cheers
Jon
--
nvpublic
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
