Cc: Rob, devicetree ML
On 31.05.2020 01:57, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
On Sat, May 30, 2020 at 1:33 AM Sylwester Nawrocki s.nawrocki@samsung.com wrote:
This patch adds registration of a child platform device for the exynos interconnect driver. It is assumed that the interconnect provider will only be needed when #interconnect-cells property is present in the bus DT node, hence the child device will be created only when such a property is present.
Signed-off-by: Sylwester Nawrocki s.nawrocki@samsung.com
Changes for v5:
- new patch.
drivers/devfreq/exynos-bus.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/devfreq/exynos-bus.c b/drivers/devfreq/exynos-bus.c index 8fa8eb5..856e37d 100644 --- a/drivers/devfreq/exynos-bus.c +++ b/drivers/devfreq/exynos-bus.c @@ -24,6 +24,7 @@
struct exynos_bus { struct device *dev;
struct platform_device *icc_pdev; struct devfreq *devfreq; struct devfreq_event_dev **edev;@@ -156,6 +157,8 @@ static void exynos_bus_exit(struct device *dev) if (ret < 0) dev_warn(dev, "failed to disable the devfreq-event devices\n");
platform_device_unregister(bus->icc_pdev);dev_pm_opp_of_remove_table(dev); clk_disable_unprepare(bus->clk); if (bus->opp_table) {@@ -168,6 +171,8 @@ static void exynos_bus_passive_exit(struct device *dev) { struct exynos_bus *bus = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
platform_device_unregister(bus->icc_pdev);dev_pm_opp_of_remove_table(dev); clk_disable_unprepare(bus->clk);} @@ -431,6 +436,18 @@ static int exynos_bus_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) if (ret < 0) goto err;
/* Create child platform device for the interconnect provider */if (of_get_property(dev->of_node, "#interconnect-cells", NULL)) {bus->icc_pdev = platform_device_register_data(dev, "exynos-generic-icc",PLATFORM_DEVID_AUTO, NULL, 0);if (IS_ERR(bus->icc_pdev)) {ret = PTR_ERR(bus->icc_pdev);goto err;}}max_state = bus->devfreq->profile->max_state; min_freq = (bus->devfreq->profile->freq_table[0] / 1000); max_freq = (bus->devfreq->profile->freq_table[max_state - 1] / 1000);-- 2.7.4
It looks like very similar like the registering the interconnect device of imx-bus.c and I already reviewed and agreed this approach.
Acked-by: Chanwoo Choi cw00.choi@samsung.com
nitpick: IMHO, I think that 'exynos-icc' is proper and simple without 'generic' word. If we need to add new icc compatible int the future, we will add 'exynosXXXX-icc' new compatible. But, I'm not forcing it. just opinion. Anyway, I agree this approach.
Thanks for review. I will change the name to exynos-icc in next version, as I commented at other patch, it is not part of any DT binding, it is just for device/driver matching between devfreq and interconnect.
-- Thanks, Sylwester