On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 10:42:49AM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On 26/04/17 14:55, Mark Brown wrote:
As I'm getting fed up of saying: if the values you are setting are not voltages and do not behave like voltages then the hardware should not be represented as a voltage regulator since if they are represented as voltage regulators things will expect to be able to control them as voltage regulators. This hardware is quite clearly providing OPPs directly, I would expect this to be handled in the OPP code somehow.
I agree with you that we need to be absolutely sure on what it actually represents.
But as more and more platform are pushing such power controls to dedicated M3 or similar processors, we need abstraction. Though we are controlling hardware, we do so indirectly. Since there were discussions around device tree representing hardware vs platform, I tend to think, we are moving towards platform(something similar to ACPI).
I don't think there's a meaningful hardware/platform distinction here - in terms of what DT is describing the platform bit is just what the hardware (the microcontrollers) happen to do, DT doesn't much care about that though.