On 04/23/2014 10:46 AM, Tomasz Figa wrote: > This patch introduces generic code to perform power domain look-up using > device tree and automatically bind devices to their power domains. > Generic device tree binding is introduced to specify power domains of > devices in their device tree nodes. > > Backwards compatibility with legacy Samsung-specific power domain > bindings is provided, but for now the new code is not compiled when > CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS is selected to avoid collision with legacy code. This > will change as soon as Exynos power domain code gets converted to use > the generic framework in further patch.
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/power_domain.txt > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/power_domain.txt > +==Power domain consumers== > + > +Required properties: > + - power-domain : A phandle and power domain specifier as defined by bindings > + of power controller specified by phandle. It seems quite likely that a single logical device could have components in multiple power domains. Consider an HDMI controller with different power domains for the HDMI core, CEC communication, DDC/I2C communication, and the I/O pads, with no clear separation between those two components of the module (no separate register spaces, but the bits/registers are interleaved all together). As such, I think that rather than a "power-domain" property, we need a pair of "power-domains", and "power-domain-names" properties, and preferably with mandatory usage of name-based lookups, rather than allowing a random mix of name-based and index-based lookups like we have with some existing resource bindings. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
