[PATCH RFC v2 2/2] Documentation: arm: define DT C-states bindings

[Mark Brown]

On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 01:31:48PM +0000, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 11:16:46AM +0000, Vincent Guittot wrote:

> > > +       - psci-power-state
> > > +               Usage: Required if entry-method property value is set to
> > > +                      "psci".
> > > +               Value type: <u32>
> > > +               Definition: power_state parameter to pass to the PSCI
> > > +                           suspend call to enter the C-state.

> > Why psci has got a dedicated field and not vendor methods ? can't you
> > make that more generic ?

> If anyone provides me with an example usage why not, for now I know I
> need that parameter for PSCI, I can call it differently, define it for PSCI
> and leave it as optional for other methods.

Would it not be sensible to define a PSCI binding that extends this and
other bindings - ISTR some other properties getting scattered into
bindings for it?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20140122/08080b74/attachment.sig>