linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 2/6] dt-bindings: power: Add qcom rpm power domain driver bindings

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20180704055757.4li26b6poxllmh2k@vireshk-i7>
Date:   Wed, 4 Jul 2018 11:27:57 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:     Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Cc:     Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@...eaurora.org>, sboyd@...nel.org,
        andy.gross@...aro.org, ulf.hansson@...aro.org,
        collinsd@...eaurora.org, mka@...omium.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/6] dt-bindings: power: Add qcom rpm power domain
 driver bindings

On 03-07-18, 16:35, Rob Herring wrote:
> > +qcom,level values specified in the OPP tables for RPMh power domains
> > +should use the RPMH_REGULATOR_LEVEL_* constants from
> > +<dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmhpd.h>
> > +
> > +	rpmhpd: power-controller {
> > +		compatible = "qcom,sdm845-rpmhpd";
> > +		#power-domain-cells = <1>;
> > +		operating-points-v2 = <&rpmhpd_opp_table>;
> > +	};
> > +
> > +	rpmhpd_opp_table: opp-table {
> > +		compatible = "operating-points-v2-qcom-level";
> > +
> > +		rpmhpd_opp_ret: opp1 {
> > +			qcom,level = <RPMH_REGULATOR_LEVEL_RETENTION>;
> > +		};
> 
> I don't see the point in using the OPP binding here when you aren't 
> using *any* of the properties from it.

Yeah, that's the case for now. But there are cases (as Stephen
mentioned earlier [1]) where the voltage values (and maybe other
values like current, etc) would be known and filled in DT. And that's
why we all agreed to use OPP tables for PM domains as well, as these
are really "operating performance points" of these PM domains.

-- 
viresh

[1] lkml.kernel.org/r/20180110025454.GG21040@...eaurora.org