[PATCH v3 3/8] PM / Domains: Allow domain power states to be read from DT

[Sudeep Holla]

On 14/10/16 18:47, Lina Iyer wrote:
> This patch allows domains to define idle states in the DT. SoC's can
> define domain idle states in DT using the "domain-idle-states" property
> of the domain provider. Add API to read the idle states from DT that can
> be set in the genpd object.
>
> This patch is based on the original patch by Marc Titinger.
>
> Signed-off-by: Marc Titinger <mtitinger+renesas at baylibre.com>
> Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson at linaro.org>
> Signed-off-by: Lina Iyer <lina.iyer at linaro.org>
> ---
>  drivers/base/power/domain.c | 94 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  include/linux/pm_domain.h   |  8 ++++
>  2 files changed, 102 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/base/power/domain.c b/drivers/base/power/domain.c
> index 37ab7f1..9af75ba 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/power/domain.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/power/domain.c
> @@ -1916,6 +1916,100 @@ out:
>  	return ret ? -EPROBE_DEFER : 0;
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(genpd_dev_pm_attach);
> +
> +static const struct of_device_id idle_state_match[] = {
> +	{ .compatible = "arm,idle-state", },
> +	{ }
> +};
> +

I still think it's better to have another compatible to serve this
purpose. We don't want to end up creating genpd domains just because
they are "arm,idle-state" compatible IMO ?

I agree you can prevent it checking for OSC mode support in the
firmware. But I want to understand if you have any strong reasons for
avoiding that approach.

-- 
Regards,
Sudeep