[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <bfed1f52-1544-8491-9f0f-b46c2787b45e@linaro.org>
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2018 20:05:39 +0200
From: Georgi Djakov <georgi.djakov@...aro.org>
To: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
rjw@...ysocki.net, mturquette@...libre.com, khilman@...libre.com,
vincent.guittot@...aro.org, skannan@...eaurora.org,
bjorn.andersson@...aro.org, amit.kucheria@...aro.org,
seansw@....qualcomm.com, daidavid1@...eaurora.org,
evgreen@...omium.org, mark.rutland@....com,
lorenzo.pieralisi@....com, abailon@...libre.com,
maxime.ripard@...tlin.com, arnd@...db.de,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
Krishna Sitaraman <ksitaraman@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 2/8] dt-bindings: Introduce interconnect binding
Hi Rob,
On 9/26/18 17:42, Georgi Djakov wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
> Thanks for the comments!
>
> On 09/25/2018 09:02 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 05:01:45PM +0300, Georgi Djakov wrote:
>>> This binding is intended to represent the relations between the interconnect
>>> controllers (providers) and consumer device nodes. It will allow creating links
>>> between consumers and interconnect paths (exposed by interconnect providers).
>>
>> As I mentioned in person, I want to see other SoC families using this
>> before accepting. They don't have to be ready for upstream, but WIP
>> patches or even just a "yes, this works for us and we're going to use
>> this binding on X".
Patches for the iMX7ULP platform are already available [1]. Thanks
Alexandre Bailon!
The interconnect API seems to be also a good fit for Nvidia SoCs. There
is an ongoing discussion about implementing an interconnect provider
driver for Tegra [2]. Thanks Thierry and Krishna!
In addition of the above, i also checked privately with a few other SoC
maintainers and made them aware of these patches. Some are not ready for
upstream yet, but the feedback was positive and i expect more SoCs to
make use of this in the future.
BR,
Georgi
[1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/11/17/368
[2] https://marc.info/?t=154056181900001&r=1&w=2
> Other than the 3 Qualcomm SoCs (msm8916, msm8996, sdm845) that are
> currently using this binding, there is ongoing work from at least two
> other vendors that would be using this same binding. I will check on
> what is their progress so far.
>
>> Also, I think the QCom GPU use of this should be fully sorted out. Or
>> more generically how this fits into OPP binding which seems to be never
>> ending extended...
>
> I see this as a further step. It could be OPP binding which include
> bandwidth values or some separate DT property. Jordan has already
> proposed something, do you have any initial comments on that?
>
> BR,
> Georgi
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists