| Message ID | 20230825112633.236607-9-ulf.hansson@linaro.org |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Commit | 6e429adc60b1fa87b6e89d68cb9d1c0a8224d58a |
| Headers | show |
| Series | arm_scmi/cpufreq: Add generic performance scaling support | expand |
On Fri, 25 Aug 2023 13:26:28 +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote: > When an CPU's performance domain is managed through the SCMI firmware, > let's enable us describe this as a consumer of a power-domain provider, > which is the de-facto standard to use for performance domains. In this > case, let's specify a corresponding power-domain-name, to point out the > corresponding index for it. > > Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org> > Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org> > Cc: Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org> > Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org > Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com> > Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> > --- > > Changes in v3: > - New patch. > > --- > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cpus.yaml | 4 +++- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 01:26:28PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote: > When an CPU's performance domain is managed through the SCMI firmware, > let's enable us describe this as a consumer of a power-domain provider, > which is the de-facto standard to use for performance domains. In this > case, let's specify a corresponding power-domain-name, to point out the > corresponding index for it. > > Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org> > Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org> > Cc: Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org> > Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org > Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com> > Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> > --- > > Changes in v3: > - New patch. This patch and 10/13 are quite generic. I am happy to take it as part of this series but just thought of checking again if that is what you prefer ?
On Thu, 21 Sept 2023 at 13:11, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 01:26:28PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote: > > When an CPU's performance domain is managed through the SCMI firmware, > > let's enable us describe this as a consumer of a power-domain provider, > > which is the de-facto standard to use for performance domains. In this > > case, let's specify a corresponding power-domain-name, to point out the > > corresponding index for it. > > > > Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org> > > Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org> > > Cc: Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org> > > Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org > > Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com> > > Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> > > --- > > > > Changes in v3: > > - New patch. > > This patch and 10/13 are quite generic. I am happy to take it as part of > this series but just thought of checking again if that is what you prefer ? Yes please, go ahead and pick this up through your scmi tree. Kind regards Uffe
On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 03:22:54PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote: > On Thu, 21 Sept 2023 at 13:11, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 01:26:28PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote: > > > When an CPU's performance domain is managed through the SCMI firmware, > > > let's enable us describe this as a consumer of a power-domain provider, > > > which is the de-facto standard to use for performance domains. In this > > > case, let's specify a corresponding power-domain-name, to point out the > > > corresponding index for it. > > > > > > Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org> > > > Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org> > > > Cc: Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org> > > > Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org > > > Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com> > > > Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> > > > --- > > > > > > Changes in v3: > > > - New patch. > > > > This patch and 10/13 are quite generic. I am happy to take it as part of > > this series but just thought of checking again if that is what you prefer ? > > Yes please, go ahead and pick this up through your scmi tree. > Thanks, I just need Viresh's ack for cpufreq changes, we are otherwise all set with the series. I will pull once I have his ack.
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cpus.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cpus.yaml index 9e6a45eea4e5..d51e6250d6e3 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cpus.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cpus.yaml @@ -305,7 +305,9 @@ properties: power-domains property. For PSCI based platforms, the name corresponding to the index of the PSCI - PM domain provider, must be "psci". + PM domain provider, must be "psci". For SCMI based platforms, the name + corresponding to the index of an SCMI performance domain provider, must be + "perf". qcom,saw: $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/phandle
When an CPU's performance domain is managed through the SCMI firmware, let's enable us describe this as a consumer of a power-domain provider, which is the de-facto standard to use for performance domains. In this case, let's specify a corresponding power-domain-name, to point out the corresponding index for it. Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org> Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org> Cc: Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org> Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com> Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> --- Changes in v3: - New patch. --- Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cpus.yaml | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)