Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 4/9] dt-bindings: power: Add rpm power domain bindings for qcs404 | From | Rajendra Nayak <> | Date | Mon, 25 Mar 2019 09:51:25 +0530 |
| |
On 3/24/2019 11:20 PM, Sibi Sankar wrote: > From: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org> > > Add RPM Power domain bindings for the qcs404 family of SoC > > [sibis: Add supported rpmpd states for qcs404] > Signed-off-by: Sibi Sankar <sibis@codeaurora.org>
SoB ordering seems wrong.
> Signed-off-by: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org> > --- > .../devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt | 1 + > include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h | 22 +++++++++++++++++++ > 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt > index 980e5413d18f..172ccf940c5c 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt > @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ which then translates it into a corresponding voltage on a rail > Required Properties: > - compatible: Should be one of the following > * qcom,msm8996-rpmpd: RPM Power domain for the msm8996 family of SoC > + * qcom,qcs404-rpmpd: RPM Power domain for the qcs404 family of SoC > * qcom,sdm845-rpmhpd: RPMh Power domain for the sdm845 family of SoC > - #power-domain-cells: number of cells in Power domain specifier > must be 1. > diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h b/include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h > index 87d9c6611682..450378662944 100644 > --- a/include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h > +++ b/include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h > @@ -36,4 +36,26 @@ > #define MSM8996_VDDSSCX 5 > #define MSM8996_VDDSSCX_VFC 6 > > +/* QCS404 Power Domains */ > +#define QCS404_VDDMX 0 > +#define QCS404_VDDMX_AO 1 > +#define QCS404_VDDMX_VFL 2 > +#define QCS404_LPICX 3 > +#define QCS404_LPICX_VFL 4 > +#define QCS404_LPIMX 5 > +#define QCS404_LPIMX_VFL 6 > + > +/* RPM SMD Power Domain performance levels */
so unlike in the sdm845 case where we map these levels to (contiguous) corners before passing it over to rpm, we seem to pass these as-is to rpm, right?
Does this work if the user passes some value which does not really map to a level defined here? For instance if value passed is 17 for instance do we fall back to 16?
> +#define RPM_SMD_LEVEL_RETENTION 16 > +#define RPM_SMD_LEVEL_RETENTION_PLUS 32 > +#define RPM_SMD_LEVEL_MIN_SVS 48 > +#define RPM_SMD_LEVEL_LOW_SVS 64 > +#define RPM_SMD_LEVEL_SVS 128 > +#define RPM_SMD_LEVEL_SVS_PLUS 192 > +#define RPM_SMD_LEVEL_NOM 256 > +#define RPM_SMD_LEVEL_NOM_PLUS 320 > +#define RPM_SMD_LEVEL_TURBO 384 > +#define RPM_SMD_LEVEL_TURBO_NO_CPR 416 > +#define RPM_SMD_LEVEL_BINNING 512 > + > #endif >
-- QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation
| |