[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMuHMdU0AVFVb3tXW4wkEibSx50nzYKW1GopgZPfKp1SS7Mf1g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2021 15:06:48 +0200
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
Cc: "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>,
Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PM: domains: Don't attach a device to genpd that
corresponds to a provider
Hi Ulf,
Thanks for your patch!
On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 2:56 PM Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org> wrote:
> According to the common power domain DT bindings, a power domain provider
> must have a "#power-domain-cells" property in its OF node. Additionally, if
> a provider has a "power-domains" property, it means that it has a parent
> domain.
OK.
> It has turned out that some OF nodes that represents a genpd provider may
> also be compatible with a regular platform device. This leads to, during
> probe, genpd_dev_pm_attach(), genpd_dev_pm_attach_by_name() and
> genpd_dev_pm_attach_by_id() tries to attach the corresponding struct device
> to the genpd provider's parent domain, which is wrong. Instead the genpd
Why is that wrong?
> provider should only assign a parent domain, through
> pm_genpd_add_subdomain() or of_genpd_add_subdomain().
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
Powered by blists - more mailing lists