[PATCH V5 11/14] soc: tegra: pmc: Add generic PM domain support

[Ulf Hansson]

[...]

>>>
>>> Why not make pm_genpd_remove() to behave as you describe for
>>> pm_genpd_remove_tail()?
>>> That's probably the only sane way to remove genpds anyhow!?
>>
>> Simply to offer flexibility. I could see that for some devices that have
>> no dependencies between pm-domains and have a static list of pm-domains,
>> they can simply call pm_genpd_remove() for a given pm-domain. However,
>> that said, I can envision a case where a single pm-domain would be
>> removed by itself and so may be there is no benefit?
>
> By the way, do you think that instead of passing the struct device * to
> pm_genpd_remove(), we should just have a void *dev_id in the same way
> the request_irq()/free_irq() work? In other words, it would allow people
> to use the struct device or struct device_node, etc?

Hmm. Do you think that would make a difference for the power controller drivers?

I am thinking that genpd might perhaps benefit from being able to use
the device pointer for other purposes as well!?
Giving a void *, will prevent that, won't it?

Kind regards
Uffe