Re: [PATCH v14 0/3] ARM: rk3288: Add PM Domain support

[Caesar Wang]

Hi Kevin, Heiko

Thanks for your comments.
Sorry for delay reply.

å 2015å04æ28æ 02:28, Kevin Hilman åé:
> Heiko StÃbner <heiko@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > Am Freitag, 24. April 2015, 16:07:45 schrieb Caesar Wang:
> > >      Add power domain drivers based on generic power domain for
> > > Rockchip platform, and support RK3288.
> > >
> > >      Verified on url =
> > >      https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromiumos/third_party/kernel.
> > >
> > >      At the moment,there are mass of products are using the driver.
> > > I believe the driver can happy work for next kernel.
> > I've taken a look at the driver and here are some global remarks:
> >
> > (1) You provide dt-bindings/power-domain/rk3288.h in patch 3. This breaks
> > bisectability, as the driver itself in patch 2 also includes the header and
> > would thus fail to compile if the later patch 3 is missing.
> > Ideally I think the header addition should be a separate patch itself, so that
> > we can possibly share it between driver and dts branches.
> > So 1: binding doc, 2: binding-header, 3: driver, 4: dts-changes.
OK, done.

> > (2) The dts-changes in patch 3 should also add any necessary power-domain
> > assignment on devices if they're still missing, so that we don't introduce
> > regressions. In my case my work-in-progress edp died because the powerdomain
> > was turned off automatically it seems.
OK, I will list that devices.
At the moment, I don't find the EDP driver for rockchip. (I think the 
EDP driver hasn't a upstream).

Anyway, I will test it on 
https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromiumos/third_party/kernel/+/chromeos-3.14,
Meanwhile work on next-kernel.


> > (3) more like wondering @Kevin or so, is there some more generic place for a
> > power-domain driver nowadays?
> I think the preference has been to put these under drivers/soc/<vendor> for now,
> so they can shared across arm32 and arm64.

Interesting. Do you want to put the domain driver into /driver/soc/rockchip?
I guess the efuse driver ...is also do that.

Perhaps, it's a good select in the future.


> > (4) As Tomasz remarked previously the dts should represent the hardware and
> > the power-domains are part of the pmu. There is a recent addition from Linus
> > Walleij, called simple-mfd [a] that is supposed to get added real early for
> > kernel 4.2. So I'd think the power-domains should use that and the patchset
> > modified to include the changes shown below [b]?
> >
> > (5) Keven Hilman and Tomasz had reservations about all the device clocks
> > being listed in the power-domains itself in the previous versions. I don't see
> > a comment from them yet changing that view.
> Correct.

How about this patch?

https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/5145241/

I will do that.

Maybe, do you have more suggestions?


> > Their wish was to get the clocks by reading the clocks from the device nodes,
> > though I see a problem on how to handle devices that do not have any bindings
> > at all yet.
> >
> > Kevin, Tomasz any new thoughts?
> I don't see any issues with devices that don't have bindings, as all
> that would be needed would be to simple device nodes with a clock
> property.  I wouldn't even matter if those devices had device drivers.
>
> Kevin

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/