Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:8 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:8;
Message-ID: <04a6eefa-235c-c973-8c74-eb8a8982abf4@ti.com>
Date:   Mon, 16 Oct 2023 13:07:21 +0530
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.11.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/tidss: Power up attached PM domains on probe
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org>
CC:     <jyri.sarha@iki.fi>, <tomi.valkeinen@ideasonboard.com>,
        <airlied@gmail.com>, <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
        <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>, <tzimmermann@suse.de>,
        <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        <praneeth@ti.com>, <nm@ti.com>, <vigneshr@ti.com>,
        <a-bhatia1@ti.com>, <j-luthra@ti.com>, <r-ravikumar@ti.com>,
        <j-choudhary@ti.com>
References: <20231009075018.2836020-1-devarsht@ti.com>
 <c9f17f9e-b9b5-9685-30ca-6a7d041dd8aa@ti.com>
 <libnfyaftywmfr2gmkdjsv6cptzjyrrx2tkxczusifnwthyh36@olzd2e5hagtr>
From:   Devarsh Thakkar <devarsht@ti.com>
In-Reply-To: <libnfyaftywmfr2gmkdjsv6cptzjyrrx2tkxczusifnwthyh36@olzd2e5hagtr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

Hi Maxime,

On 12/10/23 18:10, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Thu, Oct 12, 2023 at 05:10:06PM +0530, Devarsh Thakkar wrote:
>> On 09/10/23 13:20, Devarsh Thakkar wrote:
>>> Some SoC's such as AM62P have dedicated power domains
>>> for OLDI which need to be powered on separetely along
>>> with display controller.
>>>
>>> So during driver probe, power up all attached PM domains
>>> enumerated in devicetree node for DSS.
>>>
>>> This also prepares base to add display support for AM62P.
>>>
>>
>> NAK, for this patch, as discussed with team there are already plans
>> to have separate OLDI bridge driver which should eventually handle
>> the additional power domains.
> 
> Just for the record in case your current plan doesn't work out and we
> need to revisit this patch: my point was that it's something that
> deviates by a margin from what drivers are usually expected to do, so we
> should document why that deviation is there.
> 

Sure, thanks for suggesting, I agree that if going with this logic, we should
definitely put a comment in driver regarding same.

> The patch itself looks reasonable to me otherwise.

Yes, it's just that we are planning a separate driver for OLDI. We will see if
we need similar logic in that driver too.

Regards
Devarsh

> 
> Maxime