Krzysztof Kozlowski [off-list ref] writes:

On 19.02.2016 02:58, Punit Agrawal wrote:

quoted

Hi Krzysztof,

Krzysztof Kozlowski [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

On Exynos5420 we support 8 cpufreq steps (600-1300 MHz) for LITTLE and
12 steps for big core (700-1800 MHz). Add respective cooling cells.

Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <redacted>

---

Changes since v1:
1. Add cooling properties to all CPUs (suggested by Viresh).
---
 arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5420-cpus.dtsi | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+)

diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5420-cpus.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5420-cpus.dtsi
index 261d25173f61..5c052d7ff554 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5420-cpus.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5420-cpus.dtsi

@@ -33,6 +33,9 @@
 			clock-frequency = <1800000000>;
 			cci-control-port = <&cci_control1>;
 			operating-points-v2 = <&cluster_a15_opp_table>;
+			cooling-min-level = <0>;
+			cooling-max-level = <11>;

Although the above two properties are defined they aren't parsed in the
kernel.

Setting min / max extents for cooling devices via cooling maps does work
though.

It is described as optional property in
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/thermal/thermal.txt ... but indeed it
is totally ignored.

So what is the recommendation? Get rid of it from DTS and documentation
or leave it because it will be implemented someday?

As long as you are not expecting any particular behaviour arising from
that property today I think it should be fine to leave it in.

Eduardo, do you agree?

Thanks for feedback!

Best regards,
Krzysztof


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel