On 10-10-18, 08:27, Jordan Crouse wrote:

I'm not convinced that required-opps would work. I'm worried that the
format is too vague if we need to use it for multiple paths and possibly
other uses too, consider this:

required-opp = <&mdp_path0_opp3, &mdp_path1_opp5, &mdp_rpmh_opp1>;

This has ordering problems and IMO pollutes the DT namespace for no
great technical advantage. I appreciate the hesitation for opening up
the flood gates for new OPP bindings but we are entering a new era
of hyper power aware devices and some concessions will need to be made.

Sure.

-- 
viresh
_______________________________________________
Freedreno mailing list
Freedreno@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/freedreno