| Message ID | 20250403-dt-cpu-schema-v1-9-076be7171a85@kernel.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Handled Elsewhere |
| Headers | show |
| Series | None | expand |
On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 at 05:02, Rob Herring (Arm) <robh@kernel.org> wrote: > > "rpmhpd" is not documented nor used anywhere. As the enable-method is > "psci" use "psci" for the power-domain name. > > Signed-off-by: Rob Herring (Arm) <robh@kernel.org> > --- > arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom/qcom-sdx55.dtsi | 2 +- > arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom/qcom-sdx65.dtsi | 2 +- > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom/qcom-sdx55.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom/qcom-sdx55.dtsi > index 39530eb580ea..64d9858b4248 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom/qcom-sdx55.dtsi > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom/qcom-sdx55.dtsi > @@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ cpu0: cpu@0 { > enable-method = "psci"; > clocks = <&apcs>; > power-domains = <&rpmhpd SDX55_CX>; > - power-domain-names = "rpmhpd"; > + power-domain-names = "psci"; As I understand it, this isn't for cpu-power-mgmt but for cpu-performance-scaling. I have been thinking of adding a common power-domain-name for this, but never reached to do it. I think the last one we added was the Airoha SoC [1] which uses "perf", which seems to be the most common one. Still I don't see that being documented. > operating-points-v2 = <&cpu_opp_table>; > }; > }; > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom/qcom-sdx65.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom/qcom-sdx65.dtsi > index 6b23ee676c9e..bfd04e53c5a8 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom/qcom-sdx65.dtsi > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom/qcom-sdx65.dtsi > @@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ cpu0: cpu@0 { > enable-method = "psci"; > clocks = <&apcs>; > power-domains = <&rpmhpd SDX65_CX_AO>; > - power-domain-names = "rpmhpd"; > + power-domain-names = "psci"; Ditto. > operating-points-v2 = <&cpu_opp_table>; > }; > }; > > -- > 2.47.2 > > Kind regards Uffe [1] drivers/cpufreq/airoha-cpufreq.c Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/airoha,en7581-cpufreq.yaml drivers/pmdomain/mediatek/airoha-cpu-pmdomain.c
On Fri, Apr 4, 2025 at 5:31 AM Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> wrote: > > On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 at 05:02, Rob Herring (Arm) <robh@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > "rpmhpd" is not documented nor used anywhere. As the enable-method is > > "psci" use "psci" for the power-domain name. > > > > Signed-off-by: Rob Herring (Arm) <robh@kernel.org> > > --- > > arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom/qcom-sdx55.dtsi | 2 +- > > arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom/qcom-sdx65.dtsi | 2 +- > > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom/qcom-sdx55.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom/qcom-sdx55.dtsi > > index 39530eb580ea..64d9858b4248 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom/qcom-sdx55.dtsi > > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom/qcom-sdx55.dtsi > > @@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ cpu0: cpu@0 { > > enable-method = "psci"; > > clocks = <&apcs>; > > power-domains = <&rpmhpd SDX55_CX>; > > - power-domain-names = "rpmhpd"; > > + power-domain-names = "psci"; > > As I understand it, this isn't for cpu-power-mgmt but for > cpu-performance-scaling. > > I have been thinking of adding a common power-domain-name for this, > but never reached to do it. I think the last one we added was the > Airoha SoC [1] which uses "perf", which seems to be the most common > one. Still I don't see that being documented. It's all a mess and abuse of the power-domains binding... "perf" is documented. I can add "rpmhpd" I suppose, but I don't see anything using the name. Or I can remove it. Rob
On 4/4/25 4:59 AM, Rob Herring (Arm) wrote: > "rpmhpd" is not documented nor used anywhere. As the enable-method is > "psci" use "psci" for the power-domain name. > > Signed-off-by: Rob Herring (Arm) <robh@kernel.org> > --- "psci" is what we want here, but these platforms require some more massaging.. These SoCs don't seem to have any PSCI idle states (deeper than WFI) described, which is no bueno, as they support some.. I'll try to improve this. Konrad
On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 at 22:41, Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@oss.qualcomm.com> wrote: > > On 4/4/25 4:59 AM, Rob Herring (Arm) wrote: > > "rpmhpd" is not documented nor used anywhere. As the enable-method is > > "psci" use "psci" for the power-domain name. > > > > Signed-off-by: Rob Herring (Arm) <robh@kernel.org> > > --- > > "psci" is what we want here, but these platforms require some more > massaging.. So this isn't for CPU performance scaling? > > These SoCs don't seem to have any PSCI idle states (deeper than WFI) > described, which is no bueno, as they support some.. If PSCI PC mode is the only supported CPU suspend mode, we don't need the power-domain topology to be described in DT as it's optional to use. Is this a PC or OSI based platform? > > I'll try to improve this. > > Konrad > Kind regards Uffe
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom/qcom-sdx55.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom/qcom-sdx55.dtsi index 39530eb580ea..64d9858b4248 100644 --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom/qcom-sdx55.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom/qcom-sdx55.dtsi @@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ cpu0: cpu@0 { enable-method = "psci"; clocks = <&apcs>; power-domains = <&rpmhpd SDX55_CX>; - power-domain-names = "rpmhpd"; + power-domain-names = "psci"; operating-points-v2 = <&cpu_opp_table>; }; }; diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom/qcom-sdx65.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom/qcom-sdx65.dtsi index 6b23ee676c9e..bfd04e53c5a8 100644 --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom/qcom-sdx65.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom/qcom-sdx65.dtsi @@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ cpu0: cpu@0 { enable-method = "psci"; clocks = <&apcs>; power-domains = <&rpmhpd SDX65_CX_AO>; - power-domain-names = "rpmhpd"; + power-domain-names = "psci"; operating-points-v2 = <&cpu_opp_table>; }; };
"rpmhpd" is not documented nor used anywhere. As the enable-method is "psci" use "psci" for the power-domain name. Signed-off-by: Rob Herring (Arm) <robh@kernel.org> --- arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom/qcom-sdx55.dtsi | 2 +- arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom/qcom-sdx65.dtsi | 2 +- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)