On 29-11-17, 10:46, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 7:47 AM, Viresh Kumar <[email protected]> wrote:
> > +- power-domain-opp: This contains phandle to one of the OPP nodes of the 
> > master
> > +  power domain. This specifies the minimum required OPP of the master 
> > domain for
> > +  the functioning of the device in this OPP (where this property is 
> > present).
> > +  This property can only be set for a device if the device node contains 
> > the
> > +  "power-domains" property. Also, either all or none of the OPP nodes in 
> > an OPP
> > +  table should have it set.
> 
> This is a "this device requires OPP n" property. Couldn't we want this
> for cases other than a powerdomain OPP? What if a device has
> requirements 2 different OPPs?

Hmm, I agree. We can/should make it more generic.

> On the flipside, I don't think we want devices picking things like CPU
> OPPs and putting policy here. But I'd rather things be extendable than
> reviewing yet another OPP property next month.

Sure, I would rename this property and make necessary changes to it.

-- 
viresh

Reply via email to