Messages in this thread | | | From | Ulf Hansson <> | Date | Fri, 9 Jul 2021 15:22:27 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] PM: domains: Don't attach a device to genpd that corresponds to a provider |
| |
On Fri, 9 Jul 2021 at 15:07, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote: > > Hi Ulf, > > Thanks for your patch! > > On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 2:56 PM Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> wrote: > > According to the common power domain DT bindings, a power domain provider > > must have a "#power-domain-cells" property in its OF node. Additionally, if > > a provider has a "power-domains" property, it means that it has a parent > > domain. > > OK. > > > It has turned out that some OF nodes that represents a genpd provider may > > also be compatible with a regular platform device. This leads to, during > > probe, genpd_dev_pm_attach(), genpd_dev_pm_attach_by_name() and > > genpd_dev_pm_attach_by_id() tries to attach the corresponding struct device > > to the genpd provider's parent domain, which is wrong. Instead the genpd > > Why is that wrong?
It may lead to that the struct device that corresponds to a genpd provider may be attached to the parent domain. In other words, the parent domain will not only be controlled by a child domain (corresponding to the provider), but also through the provider's struct device. As far as I can tell, this has never been the intent for how things should work in genpd.
So wrong or not, I guess it depends on what you expect to happen.
Do you see an issue with changing this?
> > > provider should only assign a parent domain, through > > pm_genpd_add_subdomain() or of_genpd_add_subdomain().
Kind regards Uffe
| |