| Message ID | 20190110040209.6028-1-rnayak@codeaurora.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | Add power domain driver for corners on msm8996/sdm845 | expand |
+Rafael On 10-01-19, 09:32, Rajendra Nayak wrote: > Changes in v11: > * Updated opp-level binding description based on feedback > from Viresh > * Other minor fixups in 'PATCH 2/9' > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/opp/opp.txt | 3 + > .../devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt | 145 +++++++ > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8996.dtsi | 34 ++ > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi | 51 +++ > drivers/opp/core.c | 18 + > drivers/opp/of.c | 2 + > drivers/opp/opp.h | 2 + > drivers/soc/qcom/Kconfig | 18 + > drivers/soc/qcom/Makefile | 2 + > drivers/soc/qcom/rpmhpd.c | 402 ++++++++++++++++++ > drivers/soc/qcom/rpmpd.c | 317 ++++++++++++++ > include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h | 39 ++ > include/linux/pm_opp.h | 7 + > 13 files changed, 1040 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt > create mode 100644 drivers/soc/qcom/rpmhpd.c > create mode 100644 drivers/soc/qcom/rpmpd.c > create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h Rafael/Ulf: Who should pick this series ? Should I take this via OPP tree ?
On Wed 09 Jan 22:33 PST 2019, Viresh Kumar wrote: > +Rafael > > On 10-01-19, 09:32, Rajendra Nayak wrote: > > Changes in v11: > > * Updated opp-level binding description based on feedback > > from Viresh > > * Other minor fixups in 'PATCH 2/9' > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/opp/opp.txt | 3 + > > .../devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt | 145 +++++++ > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8996.dtsi | 34 ++ > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi | 51 +++ > > drivers/opp/core.c | 18 + > > drivers/opp/of.c | 2 + > > drivers/opp/opp.h | 2 + > > drivers/soc/qcom/Kconfig | 18 + > > drivers/soc/qcom/Makefile | 2 + > > drivers/soc/qcom/rpmhpd.c | 402 ++++++++++++++++++ > > drivers/soc/qcom/rpmpd.c | 317 ++++++++++++++ > > include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h | 39 ++ > > include/linux/pm_opp.h | 7 + > > 13 files changed, 1040 insertions(+) > > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt > > create mode 100644 drivers/soc/qcom/rpmhpd.c > > create mode 100644 drivers/soc/qcom/rpmpd.c > > create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h > > Rafael/Ulf: Who should pick this series ? Should I take this via OPP > tree ? > Given that the weight of the patches lies in arm-soc area it could be favourable to just take them that way, with the one opp-patch carrying your (Rafael's?) ack. If you prefer otherwise, I suggest that we take patch 6 and 8 (the two dts patches) through arm-soc and you merge the rest in your tree. Regards, Bjorn
On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 at 06:52, Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org> wrote: > > On Wed 09 Jan 22:33 PST 2019, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > > +Rafael > > > > On 10-01-19, 09:32, Rajendra Nayak wrote: > > > Changes in v11: > > > * Updated opp-level binding description based on feedback > > > from Viresh > > > * Other minor fixups in 'PATCH 2/9' > > > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/opp/opp.txt | 3 + > > > .../devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt | 145 +++++++ > > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8996.dtsi | 34 ++ > > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi | 51 +++ > > > drivers/opp/core.c | 18 + > > > drivers/opp/of.c | 2 + > > > drivers/opp/opp.h | 2 + > > > drivers/soc/qcom/Kconfig | 18 + > > > drivers/soc/qcom/Makefile | 2 + > > > drivers/soc/qcom/rpmhpd.c | 402 ++++++++++++++++++ > > > drivers/soc/qcom/rpmpd.c | 317 ++++++++++++++ > > > include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h | 39 ++ > > > include/linux/pm_opp.h | 7 + > > > 13 files changed, 1040 insertions(+) > > > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt > > > create mode 100644 drivers/soc/qcom/rpmhpd.c > > > create mode 100644 drivers/soc/qcom/rpmpd.c > > > create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h > > > > Rafael/Ulf: Who should pick this series ? Should I take this via OPP > > tree ? > > > > Given that the weight of the patches lies in arm-soc area it could be > favourable to just take them that way, with the one opp-patch carrying > your (Rafael's?) ack. > > If you prefer otherwise, I suggest that we take patch 6 and 8 (the two > dts patches) through arm-soc and you merge the rest in your tree. It sure sounds easiest to funnel this though the soc maintainer tree, unless Viresh think there are lots of additional changes to the OPP core going in this cycle, which thus may conflict. However, it's not my call. Kind regards Uffe
On 15-01-19, 21:52, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > On Wed 09 Jan 22:33 PST 2019, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > > +Rafael > > > > On 10-01-19, 09:32, Rajendra Nayak wrote: > > > Changes in v11: > > > * Updated opp-level binding description based on feedback > > > from Viresh > > > * Other minor fixups in 'PATCH 2/9' > > > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/opp/opp.txt | 3 + > > > .../devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt | 145 +++++++ > > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8996.dtsi | 34 ++ > > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi | 51 +++ > > > drivers/opp/core.c | 18 + > > > drivers/opp/of.c | 2 + > > > drivers/opp/opp.h | 2 + > > > drivers/soc/qcom/Kconfig | 18 + > > > drivers/soc/qcom/Makefile | 2 + > > > drivers/soc/qcom/rpmhpd.c | 402 ++++++++++++++++++ > > > drivers/soc/qcom/rpmpd.c | 317 ++++++++++++++ > > > include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h | 39 ++ > > > include/linux/pm_opp.h | 7 + > > > 13 files changed, 1040 insertions(+) > > > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt > > > create mode 100644 drivers/soc/qcom/rpmhpd.c > > > create mode 100644 drivers/soc/qcom/rpmpd.c > > > create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h > > > > Rafael/Ulf: Who should pick this series ? Should I take this via OPP > > tree ? > > > > Given that the weight of the patches lies in arm-soc area it could be > favourable to just take them that way, with the one opp-patch carrying > your (Rafael's?) ack. > > If you prefer otherwise, I suggest that we take patch 6 and 8 (the two > dts patches) through arm-soc and you merge the rest in your tree. Okay, take it via arm-soc. I will ask for a branch later on if I find more patches going for the OPP core this cycle.
On 10/01/2019 05:02, Rajendra Nayak wrote: > Rajendra Nayak (9): > dt-bindings: opp: Introduce opp-level bindings > OPP: Add support for parsing the 'opp-level' property > dt-bindings: power: Add qcom rpm power domain driver bindings > soc: qcom: rpmpd: Add a Power domain driver to model corners > soc: qcom: rpmpd: Add support for get/set performance state > arm64: dts: msm8996: Add rpmpd device node > soc: qcom: rpmhpd: Add RPMh power domain driver > arm64: dts: sdm845: Add rpmh powercontroller node > soc: qcom: rpmhpd: Mark mx as a parent for cx > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/opp/opp.txt | 3 + > .../devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt | 145 +++++++ > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8996.dtsi | 34 ++ > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi | 51 +++ Whenever I see these patches adding support for msm8996 (aka sdm820) and sdm845 simultaneously, I think to myself: "Why is sdm835 being left out? It was released between sdm820 and sdm845, it cannot be /that/ different." So I'm wondering: how much extra work would it be to add support for msm8998 aka sdm835? Regards.
On 1/17/2019 8:33 PM, Marc Gonzalez wrote: > On 10/01/2019 05:02, Rajendra Nayak wrote: > >> Rajendra Nayak (9): >> dt-bindings: opp: Introduce opp-level bindings >> OPP: Add support for parsing the 'opp-level' property >> dt-bindings: power: Add qcom rpm power domain driver bindings >> soc: qcom: rpmpd: Add a Power domain driver to model corners >> soc: qcom: rpmpd: Add support for get/set performance state >> arm64: dts: msm8996: Add rpmpd device node >> soc: qcom: rpmhpd: Add RPMh power domain driver >> arm64: dts: sdm845: Add rpmh powercontroller node >> soc: qcom: rpmhpd: Mark mx as a parent for cx >> >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/opp/opp.txt | 3 + >> .../devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt | 145 +++++++ >> arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8996.dtsi | 34 ++ >> arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi | 51 +++ > > Whenever I see these patches adding support for msm8996 (aka sdm820) and sdm845 > simultaneously, I think to myself: "Why is sdm835 being left out? It was released > between sdm820 and sdm845, it cannot be /that/ different." It isn't that different, and it should be quite straight forward to add support for it with the rpmpd driver (the rpmhpd is for platforms sdm845 and beyond which use rpmh) When I started working on these patches, support for sdm835 upstream was non-existent so I started off with what was the better supported one which was the 820 (msm8996).
On 18/01/2019 04:54, Rajendra Nayak wrote: > On 1/17/2019 8:33 PM, Marc Gonzalez wrote: > >> On 10/01/2019 05:02, Rajendra Nayak wrote: >> >>> Rajendra Nayak (9): >>> dt-bindings: opp: Introduce opp-level bindings >>> OPP: Add support for parsing the 'opp-level' property >>> dt-bindings: power: Add qcom rpm power domain driver bindings >>> soc: qcom: rpmpd: Add a Power domain driver to model corners >>> soc: qcom: rpmpd: Add support for get/set performance state >>> arm64: dts: msm8996: Add rpmpd device node >>> soc: qcom: rpmhpd: Add RPMh power domain driver >>> arm64: dts: sdm845: Add rpmh powercontroller node >>> soc: qcom: rpmhpd: Mark mx as a parent for cx >>> >>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/opp/opp.txt | 3 + >>> .../devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt | 145 +++++++ >>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8996.dtsi | 34 ++ >>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi | 51 +++ >> >> Whenever I see these patches adding support for msm8996 (aka sdm820) and sdm845 >> simultaneously, I think to myself: "Why is sdm835 being left out? It was released >> between sdm820 and sdm845, it cannot be /that/ different." > > It isn't that different, and it should be quite straight forward to add support for it > with the rpmpd driver (the rpmhpd is for platforms sdm845 and beyond which use rpmh) > > When I started working on these patches, support for sdm835 upstream was non-existent > so I started off with what was the better supported one which was the 820 (msm8996). Once you land this patch series, could you take a quick look at how much work is needed to add msm8998 support? I'm betting it would take you only a few hours. Regards.
On 1/18/2019 3:47 PM, Marc Gonzalez wrote: > On 18/01/2019 04:54, Rajendra Nayak wrote: > >> On 1/17/2019 8:33 PM, Marc Gonzalez wrote: >> >>> On 10/01/2019 05:02, Rajendra Nayak wrote: >>> >>>> Rajendra Nayak (9): >>>> dt-bindings: opp: Introduce opp-level bindings >>>> OPP: Add support for parsing the 'opp-level' property >>>> dt-bindings: power: Add qcom rpm power domain driver bindings >>>> soc: qcom: rpmpd: Add a Power domain driver to model corners >>>> soc: qcom: rpmpd: Add support for get/set performance state >>>> arm64: dts: msm8996: Add rpmpd device node >>>> soc: qcom: rpmhpd: Add RPMh power domain driver >>>> arm64: dts: sdm845: Add rpmh powercontroller node >>>> soc: qcom: rpmhpd: Mark mx as a parent for cx >>>> >>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/opp/opp.txt | 3 + >>>> .../devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt | 145 +++++++ >>>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8996.dtsi | 34 ++ >>>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi | 51 +++ >>> >>> Whenever I see these patches adding support for msm8996 (aka sdm820) and sdm845 >>> simultaneously, I think to myself: "Why is sdm835 being left out? It was released >>> between sdm820 and sdm845, it cannot be /that/ different." >> >> It isn't that different, and it should be quite straight forward to add support for it >> with the rpmpd driver (the rpmhpd is for platforms sdm845 and beyond which use rpmh) >> >> When I started working on these patches, support for sdm835 upstream was non-existent >> so I started off with what was the better supported one which was the 820 (msm8996). > > Once you land this patch series, could you take a quick look at how much work is needed > to add msm8998 support? I'm betting it would take you only a few hours. Sure, I can take a look. I think I do have a 8998 device which I can probably do some testing on too.