Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: cpufreq: Introduce QCOM CPUFREQ FW bindings | From | Taniya Das <> | Date | Thu, 24 May 2018 10:48:10 +0530 |
| |
Hello Rob, Viresh,
Thank you for the comments. If I understand correctly, the device tree nodes should look something like the below.
Though I am not sure if any vendor name could be associated in the cpu nodes.
Please suggest if my understanding is wrong.
cpu@0 { qcom,freq-domain = <&freq_domain_table0>; … };
same follows for cpu 1/2/3
cpu@400 { qcom,freq-domain = <&freq_domain_table1>; … }; same follows for cpu 5/6/7
freq_domain_table0 : freq_table { reg = < >, < >, < > ; reg-names = "perf_base", "lut_base", "en_base"; };
freq_domain_table1 : freq_table { reg = < >, < >, < > ; reg-names = "perf_base", "lut_base", "en_base"; };
On 5/23/2018 7:48 PM, Rob Herring wrote: > On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 12:48 AM, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> wrote: >> On 22-05-18, 14:31, Rob Herring wrote: >>> On Sat, May 19, 2018 at 11:04:50PM +0530, Taniya Das wrote: >>>> + freq-domain-0 { >>>> + compatible = "cpufreq"; >>>> + reg = <0x17d43920 0x4>, >>>> + <0x17d43110 0x500>, >>>> + <0x17d41000 0x4>; >>>> + reg-names = "perf_base", "lut_base", "en_base"; >>>> + qcom,cpulist = <&CPU0 &CPU1 &CPU2 &CPU3>; >> >> I was thinking, can't we add platform specific properties in the CPU >> nodes ? If yes, then we can point the phandle of fw node from the CPUs >> and this awkward list can go away. > > Yes, that's fine. That would be more like OPP binding in that the CPU > points to the OPP table rather than the OPP pointing to the CPUs. > > With that, you can get rid of the child nodes completely. Just make > the parent reg property N sets of 3 addresses for N domains. > > Rob >
-- QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation.
--
| |