[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <dee9df5e-acab-579a-017c-d5f22e9e042c@linaro.org>
Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2022 12:25:56 +0100
From: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
To: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Cc: rjw@...ysocki.net, lukasz.luba@....com, heiko@...ech.de,
arnd@...aro.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
"moderated list:ARM/Rockchip SoC support"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"open list:ARM/Rockchip SoC support"
<linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 5/6] rockchip/soc/drivers: Add DTPM description for
rk3399
On 31/12/2021 14:57, Ulf Hansson wrote:
[ ... ]
>> +static struct dtpm_node __initdata rk3399_hierarchy[] = {
>> + [0]{ .name = "rk3399" },
>> + [1]{ .name = "package",
>> + .parent = &rk3399_hierarchy[0] },
>> + [2]{ .name = "/cpus/cpu@0",
>> + .type = DTPM_NODE_DT,
>> + .parent = &rk3399_hierarchy[1] },
>> + [3]{ .name = "/cpus/cpu@1",
>> + .type = DTPM_NODE_DT,
>> + .parent = &rk3399_hierarchy[1] },
>> + [4]{ .name = "/cpus/cpu@2",
>> + .type = DTPM_NODE_DT,
>> + .parent = &rk3399_hierarchy[1] },
>> + [5]{ .name = "/cpus/cpu@3",
>> + .type = DTPM_NODE_DT,
>> + .parent = &rk3399_hierarchy[1] },
>> + [6]{ .name = "/cpus/cpu@100",
>> + .type = DTPM_NODE_DT,
>> + .parent = &rk3399_hierarchy[1] },
>> + [7]{ .name = "/cpus/cpu@101",
>> + .type = DTPM_NODE_DT,
>> + .parent = &rk3399_hierarchy[1] },
>> + [8]{ .name = "rockchip,rk3399-mali",
>> + .type = DTPM_NODE_DT,
>> + .parent = &rk3399_hierarchy[1] },
>> + [9]{ },
>> +};
>
> I will not object to this, as in the end this seems like what we need
> to do, unless we can describe things through generic DT bindings for
> DTPM. Right?
Yes, as asked by Rob, we should try to describe in the kernel first.
> Although, if the above is correct, I need to stress that I am kind of
> worried that this doesn't really scale. We would need to copy lots of
> information from the DTS files into platform specific c-files, to be
> able to describe the DTPM hierarchy.
TBH I don't think it is a lot and it is a __initdata. At least we should
begin with something and see later how to consolidate if it is needed, no?
--
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
Powered by blists - more mailing lists