RPMh power controller hosts mx domain that can be used as thermal
warming device. Add a sub-node to specify this.
Signed-off-by: Thara Gopinath <[email protected]>
---
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt | 10 ++++++++++
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt
index eb35b22..fff695d 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt
@@ -18,6 +18,16 @@ Required Properties:
Refer to <dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h> for the level values for
various OPPs for different platforms as well as Power domain indexes
+= SUBNODES
+RPMh alsp hosts power domains that can behave as thermal warming device.
+These are expressed as subnodes of the RPMh. The name of the node is used
+to identify the power domain and must therefor be "mx".
+
+- #cooling-cells:
+ Usage: optional
+ Value type: <u32>
+ Definition: must be 2
+
Example: rpmh power domain controller and OPP table
#include <dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmhpd.h>
--
2.1.4
On Wed, 16 Oct 2019 at 21:37, Thara Gopinath <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> RPMh power controller hosts mx domain that can be used as thermal
> warming device. Add a sub-node to specify this.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thara Gopinath <[email protected]>
> ---
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt | 10 ++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt
> index eb35b22..fff695d 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt
> @@ -18,6 +18,16 @@ Required Properties:
> Refer to <dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h> for the level values for
> various OPPs for different platforms as well as Power domain indexes
>
> += SUBNODES
> +RPMh alsp hosts power domains that can behave as thermal warming device.
> +These are expressed as subnodes of the RPMh. The name of the node is used
> +to identify the power domain and must therefor be "mx".
> +
> +- #cooling-cells:
> + Usage: optional
> + Value type: <u32>
> + Definition: must be 2
> +
Just wanted to express a minor thought about this. In general we use
subnodes of PM domain providers to represent the topology of PM
domains (subdomains), this is something different, which I guess is
fine.
I assume the #cooling-cells is here tells us this is not a PM domain
provider, but a "cooling device provider"?
Also, I wonder if it would be fine to specify "power-domains" here,
rather than using "name" as I think that is kind of awkward!?
> Example: rpmh power domain controller and OPP table
>
> #include <dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmhpd.h>
> --
> 2.1.4
>
Kind regards
Uffe
Hello Ulf,
Thanks for the review!
On 10/17/2019 05:04 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Oct 2019 at 21:37, Thara Gopinath <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> RPMh power controller hosts mx domain that can be used as thermal
>> warming device. Add a sub-node to specify this.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Thara Gopinath <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt | 10 ++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt
>> index eb35b22..fff695d 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt
>> @@ -18,6 +18,16 @@ Required Properties:
>> Refer to <dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h> for the level values for
>> various OPPs for different platforms as well as Power domain indexes
>>
>> += SUBNODES
>> +RPMh alsp hosts power domains that can behave as thermal warming device.
>> +These are expressed as subnodes of the RPMh. The name of the node is used
>> +to identify the power domain and must therefor be "mx".
>> +
>> +- #cooling-cells:
>> + Usage: optional
>> + Value type: <u32>
>> + Definition: must be 2
>> +
>
> Just wanted to express a minor thought about this. In general we use
> subnodes of PM domain providers to represent the topology of PM
> domains (subdomains), this is something different, which I guess is
> fine.
>
> I assume the #cooling-cells is here tells us this is not a PM domain
> provider, but a "cooling device provider"?
Yep.
>
> Also, I wonder if it would be fine to specify "power-domains" here,
> rather than using "name" as I think that is kind of awkward!?
Do you mean "power-domain-names" ? I am using this to match against the
genpd names defined in the provider driver.
Warm Regards
Thara
On Thu, 17 Oct 2019 at 17:28, Thara Gopinath <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hello Ulf,
> Thanks for the review!
>
> On 10/17/2019 05:04 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> > On Wed, 16 Oct 2019 at 21:37, Thara Gopinath <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> RPMh power controller hosts mx domain that can be used as thermal
> >> warming device. Add a sub-node to specify this.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Thara Gopinath <[email protected]>
> >> ---
> >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt | 10 ++++++++++
> >> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt
> >> index eb35b22..fff695d 100644
> >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt
> >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt
> >> @@ -18,6 +18,16 @@ Required Properties:
> >> Refer to <dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h> for the level values for
> >> various OPPs for different platforms as well as Power domain indexes
> >>
> >> += SUBNODES
> >> +RPMh alsp hosts power domains that can behave as thermal warming device.
> >> +These are expressed as subnodes of the RPMh. The name of the node is used
> >> +to identify the power domain and must therefor be "mx".
> >> +
> >> +- #cooling-cells:
> >> + Usage: optional
> >> + Value type: <u32>
> >> + Definition: must be 2
> >> +
> >
> > Just wanted to express a minor thought about this. In general we use
> > subnodes of PM domain providers to represent the topology of PM
> > domains (subdomains), this is something different, which I guess is
> > fine.
> >
> > I assume the #cooling-cells is here tells us this is not a PM domain
> > provider, but a "cooling device provider"?
> Yep.
> >
> > Also, I wonder if it would be fine to specify "power-domains" here,
> > rather than using "name" as I think that is kind of awkward!?
> Do you mean "power-domain-names" ? I am using this to match against the
> genpd names defined in the provider driver.
No. If you are using "power-domains" it means that you allow to
describe the specifier for the provider.
From Linux point of view, it means you can use dev_pm_domain_attach()
to hook up the corresponding device with the PM domain.
Using "power-domain-names" is just to allow to specify a name rather
than an index, which makes sense if there is more than one index.
Perhaps you can state that the "power-domain-names" should be there
anyway, to be a little bit future proof if ever multiple index
(multiple PM domains).
Kind regards
Uffe
On 10/17/2019 11:43 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Oct 2019 at 17:28, Thara Gopinath <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Hello Ulf,
>> Thanks for the review!
>>
>> On 10/17/2019 05:04 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>>> On Wed, 16 Oct 2019 at 21:37, Thara Gopinath <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> RPMh power controller hosts mx domain that can be used as thermal
>>>> warming device. Add a sub-node to specify this.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Thara Gopinath <[email protected]>
>>>> ---
>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt | 10 ++++++++++
>>>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt
>>>> index eb35b22..fff695d 100644
>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt
>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt
>>>> @@ -18,6 +18,16 @@ Required Properties:
>>>> Refer to <dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h> for the level values for
>>>> various OPPs for different platforms as well as Power domain indexes
>>>>
>>>> += SUBNODES
>>>> +RPMh alsp hosts power domains that can behave as thermal warming device.
>>>> +These are expressed as subnodes of the RPMh. The name of the node is used
>>>> +to identify the power domain and must therefor be "mx".
>>>> +
>>>> +- #cooling-cells:
>>>> + Usage: optional
>>>> + Value type: <u32>
>>>> + Definition: must be 2
>>>> +
>>>
>>> Just wanted to express a minor thought about this. In general we use
>>> subnodes of PM domain providers to represent the topology of PM
>>> domains (subdomains), this is something different, which I guess is
>>> fine.
>>>
>>> I assume the #cooling-cells is here tells us this is not a PM domain
>>> provider, but a "cooling device provider"?
>> Yep.
>>>
>>> Also, I wonder if it would be fine to specify "power-domains" here,
>>> rather than using "name" as I think that is kind of awkward!?
>> Do you mean "power-domain-names" ? I am using this to match against the
>> genpd names defined in the provider driver.
>
> No. If you are using "power-domains" it means that you allow to
> describe the specifier for the provider.
Yep. But won't this look funny in DT ? The provider node will have a sub
node with a power domain referencing to itself Like below: Is this ok ?
rpmhpd: power-controller {
compatible = "qcom,sdm845-rpmhpd";
#power-domain-cells = <1>;
...
...
mx_cdev: mx {
#cooling-cells = <2>;
power-domains = <&rpmhpd SDM845_MX>;
};
>
> From Linux point of view, it means you can use dev_pm_domain_attach()
> to hook up the corresponding device with the PM domain.
Yes. Only the thermal framework does not populate cdev->dev->of_node.
But it should be a trivial thing to fix it. Also if I end up creating a
separate device, it should not matter.
>
> Using "power-domain-names" is just to allow to specify a name rather
> than an index, which makes sense if there is more than one index.
> Perhaps you can state that the "power-domain-names" should be there
> anyway, to be a little bit future proof if ever multiple index
> (multiple PM domains).
>
> Kind regards
> Uffe
>
--
Warm Regards
Thara
On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 12:10:15PM -0400, Thara Gopinath wrote:
> On 10/17/2019 11:43 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> > On Thu, 17 Oct 2019 at 17:28, Thara Gopinath <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hello Ulf,
> >> Thanks for the review!
> >>
> >> On 10/17/2019 05:04 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> >>> On Wed, 16 Oct 2019 at 21:37, Thara Gopinath <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> RPMh power controller hosts mx domain that can be used as thermal
> >>>> warming device. Add a sub-node to specify this.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Thara Gopinath <[email protected]>
> >>>> ---
> >>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt | 10 ++++++++++
> >>>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt
> >>>> index eb35b22..fff695d 100644
> >>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt
> >>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt
> >>>> @@ -18,6 +18,16 @@ Required Properties:
> >>>> Refer to <dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h> for the level values for
> >>>> various OPPs for different platforms as well as Power domain indexes
> >>>>
> >>>> += SUBNODES
> >>>> +RPMh alsp hosts power domains that can behave as thermal warming device.
> >>>> +These are expressed as subnodes of the RPMh. The name of the node is used
> >>>> +to identify the power domain and must therefor be "mx".
> >>>> +
> >>>> +- #cooling-cells:
> >>>> + Usage: optional
> >>>> + Value type: <u32>
> >>>> + Definition: must be 2
> >>>> +
> >>>
> >>> Just wanted to express a minor thought about this. In general we use
> >>> subnodes of PM domain providers to represent the topology of PM
> >>> domains (subdomains), this is something different, which I guess is
> >>> fine.
> >>>
> >>> I assume the #cooling-cells is here tells us this is not a PM domain
> >>> provider, but a "cooling device provider"?
> >> Yep.
> >>>
> >>> Also, I wonder if it would be fine to specify "power-domains" here,
> >>> rather than using "name" as I think that is kind of awkward!?
> >> Do you mean "power-domain-names" ? I am using this to match against the
> >> genpd names defined in the provider driver.
> >
> > No. If you are using "power-domains" it means that you allow to
> > describe the specifier for the provider.
> Yep. But won't this look funny in DT ? The provider node will have a sub
> node with a power domain referencing to itself Like below: Is this ok ?
>
> rpmhpd: power-controller {
> compatible = "qcom,sdm845-rpmhpd";
> #power-domain-cells = <1>;
>
> ...
> ...
> mx_cdev: mx {
> #cooling-cells = <2>;
> power-domains = <&rpmhpd SDM845_MX>;
> };
>
The whole concept here seems all wrong to me. Isn't it what's in the
power domain that's the cooling device. A CPU power domain is not a
cooling device, the CPU is. Or we wouldn't make a clock a cooling
device, but what the clock drives.
Rob
On Tue, 29 Oct 2019 at 02:36, Rob Herring <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 12:10:15PM -0400, Thara Gopinath wrote:
> > On 10/17/2019 11:43 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> > > On Thu, 17 Oct 2019 at 17:28, Thara Gopinath <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Hello Ulf,
> > >> Thanks for the review!
> > >>
> > >> On 10/17/2019 05:04 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> > >>> On Wed, 16 Oct 2019 at 21:37, Thara Gopinath <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> RPMh power controller hosts mx domain that can be used as thermal
> > >>>> warming device. Add a sub-node to specify this.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Thara Gopinath <[email protected]>
> > >>>> ---
> > >>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt | 10 ++++++++++
> > >>>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
> > >>>>
> > >>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt
> > >>>> index eb35b22..fff695d 100644
> > >>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt
> > >>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt
> > >>>> @@ -18,6 +18,16 @@ Required Properties:
> > >>>> Refer to <dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h> for the level values for
> > >>>> various OPPs for different platforms as well as Power domain indexes
> > >>>>
> > >>>> += SUBNODES
> > >>>> +RPMh alsp hosts power domains that can behave as thermal warming device.
> > >>>> +These are expressed as subnodes of the RPMh. The name of the node is used
> > >>>> +to identify the power domain and must therefor be "mx".
> > >>>> +
> > >>>> +- #cooling-cells:
> > >>>> + Usage: optional
> > >>>> + Value type: <u32>
> > >>>> + Definition: must be 2
> > >>>> +
> > >>>
> > >>> Just wanted to express a minor thought about this. In general we use
> > >>> subnodes of PM domain providers to represent the topology of PM
> > >>> domains (subdomains), this is something different, which I guess is
> > >>> fine.
> > >>>
> > >>> I assume the #cooling-cells is here tells us this is not a PM domain
> > >>> provider, but a "cooling device provider"?
> > >> Yep.
> > >>>
> > >>> Also, I wonder if it would be fine to specify "power-domains" here,
> > >>> rather than using "name" as I think that is kind of awkward!?
> > >> Do you mean "power-domain-names" ? I am using this to match against the
> > >> genpd names defined in the provider driver.
> > >
> > > No. If you are using "power-domains" it means that you allow to
> > > describe the specifier for the provider.
> > Yep. But won't this look funny in DT ? The provider node will have a sub
> > node with a power domain referencing to itself Like below: Is this ok ?
> >
> > rpmhpd: power-controller {
> > compatible = "qcom,sdm845-rpmhpd";
> > #power-domain-cells = <1>;
> >
> > ...
> > ...
> > mx_cdev: mx {
> > #cooling-cells = <2>;
> > power-domains = <&rpmhpd SDM845_MX>;
> > };
> >
>
> The whole concept here seems all wrong to me. Isn't it what's in the
> power domain that's the cooling device. A CPU power domain is not a
> cooling device, the CPU is. Or we wouldn't make a clock a cooling
> device, but what the clock drives.
Well, I don't think that's entirely correct description either.
As I see it, it's really the actual PM domain (that manages voltages
for a power island), that needs to stay in full power state and
increase its voltage level, as to warm up some of the silicon. It's
not a regular device, but more a characteristics of how the PM domain
can be used.
Kind regards
Uffe
On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 5:07 AM Ulf Hansson <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 29 Oct 2019 at 02:36, Rob Herring <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 12:10:15PM -0400, Thara Gopinath wrote:
> > > On 10/17/2019 11:43 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 17 Oct 2019 at 17:28, Thara Gopinath <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> Hello Ulf,
> > > >> Thanks for the review!
> > > >>
> > > >> On 10/17/2019 05:04 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> > > >>> On Wed, 16 Oct 2019 at 21:37, Thara Gopinath <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> RPMh power controller hosts mx domain that can be used as thermal
> > > >>>> warming device. Add a sub-node to specify this.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Signed-off-by: Thara Gopinath <[email protected]>
> > > >>>> ---
> > > >>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt | 10 ++++++++++
> > > >>>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt
> > > >>>> index eb35b22..fff695d 100644
> > > >>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt
> > > >>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt
> > > >>>> @@ -18,6 +18,16 @@ Required Properties:
> > > >>>> Refer to <dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h> for the level values for
> > > >>>> various OPPs for different platforms as well as Power domain indexes
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> += SUBNODES
> > > >>>> +RPMh alsp hosts power domains that can behave as thermal warming device.
> > > >>>> +These are expressed as subnodes of the RPMh. The name of the node is used
> > > >>>> +to identify the power domain and must therefor be "mx".
> > > >>>> +
> > > >>>> +- #cooling-cells:
> > > >>>> + Usage: optional
> > > >>>> + Value type: <u32>
> > > >>>> + Definition: must be 2
> > > >>>> +
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Just wanted to express a minor thought about this. In general we use
> > > >>> subnodes of PM domain providers to represent the topology of PM
> > > >>> domains (subdomains), this is something different, which I guess is
> > > >>> fine.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> I assume the #cooling-cells is here tells us this is not a PM domain
> > > >>> provider, but a "cooling device provider"?
> > > >> Yep.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Also, I wonder if it would be fine to specify "power-domains" here,
> > > >>> rather than using "name" as I think that is kind of awkward!?
> > > >> Do you mean "power-domain-names" ? I am using this to match against the
> > > >> genpd names defined in the provider driver.
> > > >
> > > > No. If you are using "power-domains" it means that you allow to
> > > > describe the specifier for the provider.
> > > Yep. But won't this look funny in DT ? The provider node will have a sub
> > > node with a power domain referencing to itself Like below: Is this ok ?
> > >
> > > rpmhpd: power-controller {
> > > compatible = "qcom,sdm845-rpmhpd";
> > > #power-domain-cells = <1>;
> > >
> > > ...
> > > ...
> > > mx_cdev: mx {
> > > #cooling-cells = <2>;
> > > power-domains = <&rpmhpd SDM845_MX>;
> > > };
> > >
> >
> > The whole concept here seems all wrong to me. Isn't it what's in the
> > power domain that's the cooling device. A CPU power domain is not a
> > cooling device, the CPU is. Or we wouldn't make a clock a cooling
> > device, but what the clock drives.
>
> Well, I don't think that's entirely correct description either.
>
> As I see it, it's really the actual PM domain (that manages voltages
> for a power island), that needs to stay in full power state and
> increase its voltage level, as to warm up some of the silicon. It's
> not a regular device, but more a characteristics of how the PM domain
> can be used.
First I've heard of Si needing warming...
I think I'd just expect the power domain provider to know which
domains to power on then.
Rob
On Tue, 29 Oct 2019 at 21:16, Rob Herring <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 5:07 AM Ulf Hansson <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 29 Oct 2019 at 02:36, Rob Herring <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 12:10:15PM -0400, Thara Gopinath wrote:
> > > > On 10/17/2019 11:43 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, 17 Oct 2019 at 17:28, Thara Gopinath <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Hello Ulf,
> > > > >> Thanks for the review!
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On 10/17/2019 05:04 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> > > > >>> On Wed, 16 Oct 2019 at 21:37, Thara Gopinath <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> RPMh power controller hosts mx domain that can be used as thermal
> > > > >>>> warming device. Add a sub-node to specify this.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Signed-off-by: Thara Gopinath <[email protected]>
> > > > >>>> ---
> > > > >>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt | 10 ++++++++++
> > > > >>>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt
> > > > >>>> index eb35b22..fff695d 100644
> > > > >>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt
> > > > >>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt
> > > > >>>> @@ -18,6 +18,16 @@ Required Properties:
> > > > >>>> Refer to <dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h> for the level values for
> > > > >>>> various OPPs for different platforms as well as Power domain indexes
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> += SUBNODES
> > > > >>>> +RPMh alsp hosts power domains that can behave as thermal warming device.
> > > > >>>> +These are expressed as subnodes of the RPMh. The name of the node is used
> > > > >>>> +to identify the power domain and must therefor be "mx".
> > > > >>>> +
> > > > >>>> +- #cooling-cells:
> > > > >>>> + Usage: optional
> > > > >>>> + Value type: <u32>
> > > > >>>> + Definition: must be 2
> > > > >>>> +
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Just wanted to express a minor thought about this. In general we use
> > > > >>> subnodes of PM domain providers to represent the topology of PM
> > > > >>> domains (subdomains), this is something different, which I guess is
> > > > >>> fine.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> I assume the #cooling-cells is here tells us this is not a PM domain
> > > > >>> provider, but a "cooling device provider"?
> > > > >> Yep.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Also, I wonder if it would be fine to specify "power-domains" here,
> > > > >>> rather than using "name" as I think that is kind of awkward!?
> > > > >> Do you mean "power-domain-names" ? I am using this to match against the
> > > > >> genpd names defined in the provider driver.
> > > > >
> > > > > No. If you are using "power-domains" it means that you allow to
> > > > > describe the specifier for the provider.
> > > > Yep. But won't this look funny in DT ? The provider node will have a sub
> > > > node with a power domain referencing to itself Like below: Is this ok ?
> > > >
> > > > rpmhpd: power-controller {
> > > > compatible = "qcom,sdm845-rpmhpd";
> > > > #power-domain-cells = <1>;
> > > >
> > > > ...
> > > > ...
> > > > mx_cdev: mx {
> > > > #cooling-cells = <2>;
> > > > power-domains = <&rpmhpd SDM845_MX>;
> > > > };
> > > >
> > >
> > > The whole concept here seems all wrong to me. Isn't it what's in the
> > > power domain that's the cooling device. A CPU power domain is not a
> > > cooling device, the CPU is. Or we wouldn't make a clock a cooling
> > > device, but what the clock drives.
> >
> > Well, I don't think that's entirely correct description either.
> >
> > As I see it, it's really the actual PM domain (that manages voltages
> > for a power island), that needs to stay in full power state and
> > increase its voltage level, as to warm up some of the silicon. It's
> > not a regular device, but more a characteristics of how the PM domain
> > can be used.
>
> First I've heard of Si needing warming...
I guess people go to cooler places with their devices. :-)
>
> I think I'd just expect the power domain provider to know which
> domains to power on then.
Yeah, I agree. This seems reasonable.
Thanks!
Kind regards
Uffe
Hi Rob,
Thanks for the review.
On 10/29/2019 04:16 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 5:07 AM Ulf Hansson <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 29 Oct 2019 at 02:36, Rob Herring <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 12:10:15PM -0400, Thara Gopinath wrote:
>>>> On 10/17/2019 11:43 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 17 Oct 2019 at 17:28, Thara Gopinath <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello Ulf,
>>>>>> Thanks for the review!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 10/17/2019 05:04 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wed, 16 Oct 2019 at 21:37, Thara Gopinath <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> RPMh power controller hosts mx domain that can be used as thermal
>>>>>>>> warming device. Add a sub-node to specify this.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Thara Gopinath <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt | 10 ++++++++++
>>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt
>>>>>>>> index eb35b22..fff695d 100644
>>>>>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt
>>>>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt
>>>>>>>> @@ -18,6 +18,16 @@ Required Properties:
>>>>>>>> Refer to <dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h> for the level values for
>>>>>>>> various OPPs for different platforms as well as Power domain indexes
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> += SUBNODES
>>>>>>>> +RPMh alsp hosts power domains that can behave as thermal warming device.
>>>>>>>> +These are expressed as subnodes of the RPMh. The name of the node is used
>>>>>>>> +to identify the power domain and must therefor be "mx".
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +- #cooling-cells:
>>>>>>>> + Usage: optional
>>>>>>>> + Value type: <u32>
>>>>>>>> + Definition: must be 2
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Just wanted to express a minor thought about this. In general we use
>>>>>>> subnodes of PM domain providers to represent the topology of PM
>>>>>>> domains (subdomains), this is something different, which I guess is
>>>>>>> fine.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I assume the #cooling-cells is here tells us this is not a PM domain
>>>>>>> provider, but a "cooling device provider"?
>>>>>> Yep.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Also, I wonder if it would be fine to specify "power-domains" here,
>>>>>>> rather than using "name" as I think that is kind of awkward!?
>>>>>> Do you mean "power-domain-names" ? I am using this to match against the
>>>>>> genpd names defined in the provider driver.
>>>>>
>>>>> No. If you are using "power-domains" it means that you allow to
>>>>> describe the specifier for the provider.
>>>> Yep. But won't this look funny in DT ? The provider node will have a sub
>>>> node with a power domain referencing to itself Like below: Is this ok ?
>>>>
>>>> rpmhpd: power-controller {
>>>> compatible = "qcom,sdm845-rpmhpd";
>>>> #power-domain-cells = <1>;
>>>>
>>>> ...
>>>> ...
>>>> mx_cdev: mx {
>>>> #cooling-cells = <2>;
>>>> power-domains = <&rpmhpd SDM845_MX>;
>>>> };
>>>>
>>>
>>> The whole concept here seems all wrong to me. Isn't it what's in the
>>> power domain that's the cooling device. A CPU power domain is not a
>>> cooling device, the CPU is. Or we wouldn't make a clock a cooling
>>> device, but what the clock drives.
>>
>> Well, I don't think that's entirely correct description either.
>>
>> As I see it, it's really the actual PM domain (that manages voltages
>> for a power island), that needs to stay in full power state and
>> increase its voltage level, as to warm up some of the silicon. It's
>> not a regular device, but more a characteristics of how the PM domain
>> can be used.
>
> First I've heard of Si needing warming...
Cold regions and non-closing of circuits is what I am told.
>
> I think I'd just expect the power domain provider to know which
> domains to power on then.
I will just retain #cooling-cells in the power domain provider and let
the driver identify the actual power domains.
>
> Rob
>
--
Warm Regards
Thara