[PATCH v2 08/11] dt-bindings: firmware: arm,scmi: Extend bindings for protocol at 13
Ulf Hansson
ulf.hansson at linaro.org
Fri Jul 21 04:42:43 PDT 2023
On Wed, 19 Jul 2023 at 17:17, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla at arm.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 04:17:35PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> > The protocol at 13 node is describing the performance scaling option for the
> > ARM SCMI interface, as a clock provider. This is unnecessary limiting, as
> > performance scaling is in many cases not limited to switching a clock's
> > frequency.
> >
> > Therefore, let's extend the binding so the interface can be modelled as a
> > generic performance domaintoo. The common way to describe this, is to use
> > the "power-domain" DT bindings, so let's use that.
> >
>
> One thing I forgot to ask earlier is how we can manage different domain IDs
> for perf and power domains which is the case with current SCMI platforms as
> the spec never mandated or can ever mandate the perf and power domains IDs
> to match. They need not be same anyways.
Based upon what you describe above, I have modelled the perf-domain
and the power-domain as two separate power-domain providers.
A consumer device being hooked up to both domains, would specify the
domain IDs in the second power-domain-cell, along the lines of the
below. Then we would use power-domain-names to specify what each
power-domain represents.
power-domains = <&scmi_pd 2>, <&scmi_dvfs 4>;
power-domain-names = "power", "perf";
I hope this makes it clearer!?
Kind regards
Uffe
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list