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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2018 12:01:42 +0530 From: Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@...eaurora.org> To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org> Cc: 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 7/4/2018 11:27 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: > 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. Rob, are you fine with these bindings then? If so, can we please have your reviewed-by?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists