On 01/12, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 11-01-16, 17:53, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 12/22, Viresh Kumar wrote:
OPP core can handle the regulators by itself, and it allocates the regulator based on device's name. But for older V1 bindings, many DT files have used names like 'cpu-supply' instead of 'cpu0-supply'.
The cpufreq-dt driver needs to tell the right name of the regulator in this case to the OPP core.
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar@linaro.org
This whole patch is confusing to me because old style was to be cpu0-supply, and new style is cpu-supply.
Long back we used to have cpu0-supply, then while I converted cpufreq-dt to support multiple clusters, you asked me to name it to cpu-supply, which I did.
Now, looking at the implementation into the generic OPP layer, it looks like <device>-name is a far better and reasonable choice.
It's far easier to implement, but not far better. In most designs the pin is not called <device_name>-supply, but something more mundane like vdd-supply, vddio-supply, vcc-supply, etc. In the case of CPUs, there's probably nothing in the datasheets, so cpu vs cpu0 is not too important to distinguish here. But for things like a GPU, DSP, video encoder, etc. I doubt it's going to be called <device_name>-supply, so making that the norm is misguided.