[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <eda0d218-aba0-4ade-8a9f-51b4591a32d2@linaro.org>
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 08:44:24 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
Sibi Sankar <quic_sibis@...cinc.com>, andersson@...nel.org,
djakov@...nel.org, robh+dt@...nel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org,
srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
quic_rgottimu@...cinc.com, quic_kshivnan@...cinc.com, conor+dt@...nel.org,
dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org, abel.vesa@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/3] dt-bindings: interconnect: qcom,msm8998-bwmon: Add
X1E80100 BWMON instances
On 18/06/2024 18:02, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>
>
> On 6/18/24 17:43, Sibi Sankar wrote:
>> Document X1E80100 BWMONs, which has multiple (one per cluster) BWMONv4
>> instances for the CPU->LLCC path and one BWMONv5 instance for LLCC->DDR
>> path. Also make the opp-table optional for the X1E cpu-bwmon instances,
>> since they use the same opp-table between them.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sibi Sankar <quic_sibis@...cinc.com>
>> ---
>
> I think we can just drop the opp-table child node from required altogether,
> bindings shouldn't care about where the OPP table (which is referenced in
> the operating-points-v2 property) comes from
I agree.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists