On Mon, 2020-11-30 at 19:16 +0800, Weiyi Lu wrote:

On Fri, 2020-11-27 at 13:42 +0100, Matthias Brugger wrote:

quoted

On 19/11/2020 15:13, Enric Balletbo Serra wrote:

quoted

Hi Weiyi,

Missatge de Weiyi Lu [off-list ref] del dia dj., 19 de nov.
2020 a les 14:10:

quoted

On Thu, 2020-11-19 at 13:13 +0100, Enric Balletbo Serra wrote:

quoted

Hi Weiyi,

Thank you for the patch

Missatge de Weiyi Lu [off-list ref] del dia dj., 19 de nov.
2020 a les 11:48:

quoted

Add power domains controller node for SoC mt8192

Signed-off-by: Weiyi Lu <redacted>
---

[...]

quoted

quoted

quoted

quoted

+                       /* System Power Manager */
+                       spm: power-controller {
+                               compatible = "mediatek,mt8192-power-controller";
+                               #address-cells = <1>;
+                               #size-cells = <0>;
+                               #power-domain-cells = <1>;
+
+                               /* power domain of the SoC */
+                               audio@MT8192_POWER_DOMAIN_AUDIO {

If you run the dt_bindings_check it should return some errors, as all
these node names should be 'power-domain@'. Which is a bit annoying
because then you will get a bunch of errors like this:

[    1.969110] debugfs: Directory 'power-domain' with parent
'pm_genpd' already present!
[    1.976997] debugfs: Directory 'power-domain' with parent
'pm_genpd' already present!
[    1.984828] debugfs: Directory 'power-domain' with parent
'pm_genpd' already present!
[    1.992657] debugfs: Directory 'power-domain' with parent
'pm_genpd' already present!
[    2.000685] debugfs: Directory 'power-domain' with parent
'pm_genpd' already present!
[    2.008566] debugfs: Directory 'power-domain' with parent
'pm_genpd' already present!
[    2.016395] debugfs: Directory 'power-domain' with parent
'pm_genpd' already present!
[    2.024221] debugfs: Directory 'power-domain' with parent
'pm_genpd' already present!
[    2.032049] debugfs: Directory 'power-domain' with parent
'pm_genpd' already present!
[    2.039874] debugfs: Directory 'power-domain' with parent
'pm_genpd' already present!
[    2.047699] debugfs: Directory 'power-domain' with parent
'pm_genpd' already present!
[    2.055524] debugfs: Directory 'power-domain' with parent
'pm_genpd' already present!
[    2.063352] debugfs: Directory 'power-domain' with parent
'pm_genpd' already present!
[    2.071176] debugfs: Directory 'power-domain' with parent
'pm_genpd' already present!

But that's another problem that should be handled in debugfs system.

Indeed...so I chose to use different name in dts to avoid problems in
debugfs. It does violate the naming rules.

But your binding will not pass (or trigger warnings) the dtb check
then. Rob was clear that names should be generic. Proper fix is fix
debugfs not the binding.

By the way, is anybody working on this debugfs issue?

I think we can solve this problem by adding "name" to the struct
scpsys_domain_data and use this domain_data->name as the genpd.name.
This is very simple. But I want to know if you both like it?

Hi Enric and Matthias,

May I have your opinions on how you might to fix this issue?
I'll try to give another name to each power domain in the
scpsys_domain_data and register power domain with this name like below

struct scpsys_domain_data {
 	...
+	char *name;
 };


-	pd->genpd.name = node->name;
+	pd->genpd.name = pd->data->name ?: node->name;


Does it violate the naming rules to some extent? or it's acceptable?

quoted

Regards,
Matthias

_______________________________________________
Linux-mediatek mailing list
Linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mediatek

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