[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201207262334.11789.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 23:34:11 +0200
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@...com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org,
Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
"Linux-sh list" <linux-sh@...r.kernel.org>,
Benoit Cousson <b-cousson@...com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/14] PM / shmobile: Pass power domain information via DT (was: Re: [RFD] PM: Device tree representation of power domains)
On Thursday, July 26, 2012, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 05:38:35PM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote:
>
> > That being said, I'm not sure why ti,hwmods is being used as an example
> > for powerdomains. hwmods describe the integration of SoC IP blocks
> > (base addr, IRQ, DMA channel etc., which are being moved to DT) as well
> > as a bunch of SoC specific PM register descriptions. This stuff is
> > SoC-specific PM register layout, so being very SoC specific, it has the
> > 'ti' prefix in the DT binding.
>
> I think the thing here is that one aspect of that SoC integration is
> which power domain the blocks are in. Describing which power domain an
> IP is in isn't a million miles away from describing which hwmod applies
> to an IP.
I agree.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists