Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] Generic Device Tree based power domain look-up

[Tomasz Figa]

Hi,

On 08.05.2014 14:49, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> Up till now there was no single generic method to bind devices to their
> power domains using Device Tree. Each platform has been doing this using
> its own way, example of which are Exynos power domain bindings [1] and
> look-up code [2].
> 
> This series is intended to change this and provide generic DT bindings for
> power domain specification and generic code performing look-up of power
> domains and binding them to devices.
> 
> First two patches are the most important part of this series, as they
> introduce $subject. Patch 3 converts mach-exynos to use the new generic
> method. Further patches are adding one more user of the new code,
> mach-s3c64xx, with first 3 patches (4-6) required to clean-up its power
> domain driver a bit and last 3 patches (9-11) adding display support for
> Mini6410 board, including a node for display controller (FIMD) which is
> a power domain consumer.
> 
> The design of DT bindings and provider code is heavily inspired by
> implementation of clock providers in Common Clock Framework, while
> the code binding devices to power domains by my Exynos power domain
> implementation (now removed by this series ;)).
> 
> Successfully tested on Exynos4210-based Trats and Exynos4412-based Trats2
> boards using MFC, 
> 
> [1] Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/exynos/power_domain.txt
> [2] arch/arm/mach-exynos/pm_domains.c
> 
> Changes since v3:
> (http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.power-management.general/44571)
>  - rebased onto current Rafael's linux-pm bleeding-edge branch (0a112bf),
>  - renamed "power-domain" property to "power-domains" to facilitate further
>    extension to support multiple power domains per device in future.
> 
> Changes since v2:
> (http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1658926)
>  - rebased onto current Rafael's linux-pm bleeding-edge branch,
>  - dropped patches for s3c64xx for now. I will send them in separate series,
>  - do not call pm_genpd_dev_need_restore(true) in genpd_bind_domain(),
>  - fixed various stylistic issues reported in review comments.
> 
> Changes since v1 (RFC):
> [https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/1/11/141]
>  - rebased onto current Rafael's linux-pm bleeding-edge branch,
>  - reordered the patches a bit (to have the generic ones first),
>  - dropped renaming of S3C64xx power domains (as suggested by Mark Brown),
>  - added support for deferred probing (as suggested by Stephen Boyd),
>  - fixed several minor issues pointed by Stephen Boyd,
>  - replaced notifiers with direct hooks in driver core to make power domain
>    support independent from specific bus type and allow error handling.
> 
> Tomasz Figa (3):
>   base: power: Add generic OF-based power domain look-up
>   drivercore: Bind/unbind power domain on probe/remove
>   ARM: exynos: Move to generic power domain bindings
> 
>  .../bindings/arm/exynos/power_domain.txt           |  12 +-
>  .../devicetree/bindings/power/power_domain.txt     |  51 ++++
>  arch/arm/mach-exynos/pm_domains.c                  |  81 +-----
>  drivers/base/dd.c                                  |   9 +-
>  drivers/base/power/domain.c                        | 283 +++++++++++++++++++++
>  include/linux/pm_domain.h                          |  46 ++++
>  kernel/power/Kconfig                               |   4 +
>  7 files changed, 398 insertions(+), 88 deletions(-)
>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/power_domain.txt
> 

Rob, Mark, could we have your ACK (or NAK if you find some issues) for
DT bindings introduced by this series?

Rafael, I wonder if we could still have this series applied for 3.16. I
know it is a bit late already, but the series isn't too invasive, as it
mostly generalizes what was being done on per-platform basis and makes
the code generic. Also I have already seen at least two other series
depending on this one, so they would benefit from this being merged.

Best regards,
Tomasz
--
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/