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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <e979397d-c522-e0da-b997-16609fe308c5@arm.com> Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2022 11:03:51 +0000 From: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com> To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dietmar.eggemann@....com, rafael@...nel.org, daniel.lezcano@...aro.org, nm@...com, sboyd@...nel.org, mka@...omium.org, dianders@...omium.org, robh+dt@...nel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: power: add Energy Model bindings On 2/22/22 10:12, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 22-02-22, 10:03, Lukasz Luba wrote: >> >> >> On 2/22/22 09:45, Viresh Kumar wrote: >>> On 22-02-22, 08:06, Lukasz Luba wrote: >>>> I'm not sure if that would be flexible enough to meet the requirement: >>>> power for each OPP might be different in one board vs. other board. >>> >>> Don't DT files overload values from board files all the time ? Why wouldn't the >>> same apply for OPP table as well ? >> >> In that SoC and family of the boards, there are no such examples. > > Here is one I think. > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mq-librem5-r3.dts > >> It used to be popular in arm32 boards, but I'm not sure nowadays. > > I think it is still common, not with OPPs though. > >>>> AFAIK the OPP definition is more SoC specific. >>> >>> This isn't about OPP definition as well, but just that if DT allows you to >>> override or not. I think it will. >>> >> >> Redefining the whole OPP table, when the freq, voltage, interconnect, >> and other old entries don't change isn't too messy? > > I think you misunderstood what I said. The common part of the OPP table should > stay in the central .dtsi file. The dts files though, should just add the power > specific values to the existing OPP table. > OK, I misunderstood that. If that is possible than it would be great. I'm assuming you are taking about OPP v2. I can relax the requirement that I need to provide this DT-EM for arm32, since they have a legacy OPP v1. So we might have an entry similar that interconnect for the bandwidth, but for us it would be 'opp-power-uw'? Let me have a look about some examples how that could be just added/extended in the opp table but from board file. If you have some handy link, I would be grateful.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists