[PATCH v2 3/6] rockchip: power-domain: add support for sub-power domains
From: heiko@sntech.de (Heiko Stuebner)
Date: 2016-02-19 00:20:14
Also in:
linux-rockchip, lkml
Hi Elaine, Am Donnerstag, 18. Februar 2016, 11:07:15 schrieb Elaine Zhang:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
This patch adds support for making one power domain a sub-domain of other domain. This is useful for modeling power dependences, which needs to have more than one power domain enabled to be operational. Signed-off-by: Elaine Zhang <redacted> --- drivers/soc/rockchip/pm_domains.c | 54 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 54 insertions(+)diff --git a/drivers/soc/rockchip/pm_domains.cb/drivers/soc/rockchip/pm_domains.c index 350527b..8cdf1b2 100644--- a/drivers/soc/rockchip/pm_domains.c +++ b/drivers/soc/rockchip/pm_domains.c@@ -372,6 +372,54 @@ static void rockchip_configure_pd_cnt(structrockchip_pmu *pmu, regmap_write(pmu->regmap, domain_reg_offset + 4, count); } +static int rockchip_pm_add_subdomain(struct rockchip_pmu *pmu, + struct device_node *parent) +{ + struct device_node *np; + int error; + + for_each_child_of_node(parent, np) { + struct generic_pm_domain *child_domain, *parent_domain; + u32 idx = ~0; + + if (of_property_read_u32(parent, "reg", &idx)) { + dev_err(pmu->dev, + "%s: failed to retrieve domain id (reg)\n", + parent->name); + of_node_put(parent); + return -EINVAL; + } + parent_domain = pmu->genpd_data.domains[idx]; + + error = rockchip_pm_add_one_domain(pmu, np); + if (error) { + dev_err(pmu->dev, "failed to handle node %s: %d\n", + np->name, error); + of_node_put(np); + return -ENODEV; + } + + if (of_property_read_u32(np, "reg", &idx)) { + dev_err(pmu->dev, + "%s: failed to retrieve domain id (reg)\n", + np->name); + of_node_put(np); + return -EINVAL; + } + child_domain = pmu->genpd_data.domains[idx]; + + if (pm_genpd_add_subdomain(parent_domain, child_domain)) + pr_warn("%s failed to add subdomain: %s\n", + parent_domain->name, child_domain->name);
should probably be dev_err here
+ else
+ pr_warn("%s add subdomain: %s\n",
+ parent_domain->name, child_domain->name);you don't need pr_warn / dev_warn on sucess
+ + rockchip_pm_add_subdomain(pmu, np); + } + return 0; +} +
In general the code looks like you're going to group the domains
hirarchically, like
power: power-controller {
compatible = "rockchip,rk3399-power-controller";
pd_cci {
reg = <RK3399_PD_CCI>;
clocks = ...;
pd_cci0 {
reg = <RK3399_PD_CCI0>;
clocks = ...;
};
};
};
This isn't documented in the dt-binding and also isn't really improving
reading these declarations. Instead as I said before, I think I'd like more
get inspiration from how Exynos is doing that already (arch/arm/mach-
exynos/pm_domains.c at "Assign the child power domains to their parents")
simply declaring an additional power-domains property like:
power: power-controller {
compatible = "rockchip,rk3399-power-controller";
pd_cci {
reg = <RK3399_PD_CCI>;
clocks = ...;
};
pd_cci0 {
reg = <RK3399_PD_CCI0>;
clocks = ...;
power-domains = <&power RK3399_PD_CCI>;
};
};
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
static int rockchip_pm_domain_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) { struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;@@ -437,6 +485,12 @@ static int rockchip_pm_domain_probe(structplatform_device *pdev) node->name, error); goto err_out; }
blank line here
+ error = rockchip_pm_add_subdomain(pmu, node);
+ if (error < 0) {
+ dev_err(dev, "failed to handle subdomain node %s: %d\n",
+ node->name, error);
+ goto err_out;
+ }
}
if (error) {