[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <18c791ce-059a-87a5-eaf4-057f8e232fe7@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2022 11:35:37 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Jia-Wei Chang <jia-wei.chang@...iatek.com>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>
Cc: linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, fan.chen@...iatek.com,
louis.yu@...iatek.com, roger.lu@...iatek.com,
Allen-yy.Lin@...iatek.com,
Project_Global_Chrome_Upstream_Group@...iatek.com,
hsinyi@...gle.com,
Jia-Wei Chang <jia-wei.chang@...iatek.corp-partner.google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] dt-bindings: cpufreq: mediatek: add mt8186 cpufreq
dt-bindings
On 24/03/2022 10:42, Jia-Wei Chang wrote:
> On Mon, 2022-03-07 at 19:59 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 07/03/2022 13:21, Tim Chang wrote:
>>> 1. add cci property.
>>> 2. add example of MT8186.
>>
>> One logical change at a time. Are these related? Why entirely new
>> example just for "cci" node? Maybe this should be part of existing
>> example?
>
> Yes, the cci property is required in some SoC, e.g. mt8183 and mt8186,
> because cpu and cci share the same power supplies.
I asked why this cannot be part of existing example.
> I will update the commit message and add an example of mt8186 to
> present usage of cci.
You added the example here, didn't you?
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists