Re: [RFC 4/5] ARM: dts: omap3-n950-n9: remove opp-v1 table

[H. Nikolaus Schaller]

> Am 03.09.2019 um 08:28 schrieb Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> 
> On 03-09-19, 08:23, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>> 
>>> Am 03.09.2019 um 08:14 schrieb Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>:
>>> 
>>> On 03-09-19, 08:01, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Am 03.09.2019 um 04:36 schrieb Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>:
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 02-09-19, 12:55, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>>>>>> With opp-v2 in omap36xx.dtsi and ti-cpufreq driver the
>>>>>> 1GHz capability is automatically detected.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3-n950-n9.dtsi | 7 -------
>>>>>> 1 file changed, 7 deletions(-)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3-n950-n9.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3-n950-n9.dtsi
>>>>>> index 5441e9ffdbb4..e98b0c615f19 100644
>>>>>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3-n950-n9.dtsi
>>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3-n950-n9.dtsi
>>>>>> @@ -11,13 +11,6 @@
>>>>>> 	cpus {
>>>>>> 		cpu@0 {
>>>>>> 			cpu0-supply = <&vcc>;
>>>>>> -			operating-points = <
>>>>>> -				/* kHz    uV */
>>>>>> -				300000  1012500
>>>>>> -				600000  1200000
>>>>>> -				800000  1325000
>>>>>> -				1000000	1375000
>>>>>> -			>;
>>>>>> 		};
>>>>>> 	};
>>>>> 
>>>>> This should be merged with 2/5 ?
>>>> 
>>>> Well, it bloats 2/5.
>>> 
>>> It is logically the right place to do this as that's where we are
>>> adding opp-v2.
>> 
>> Well, sometimes the philosophy of patches is to add something new
>> first and remove the old in a second separate patch if the system
>> can live with both. This makes it easier to digest single patches
>> (because they are smaller) and might also better pinpoint an issue
>> by bisect.
> 
> Right, but you already removed some of the opp-v1 stuff in patch 2/5.
> Why leave this one out ?
> 
>>> 
>>>> What I hope (I can't test) is that this opp-v1 table
>>>> is ignored if an opp-v2 table exists. So that it can be
>>>> removed by a separate follow-up patch.
>>> 
>>> It should work as that's what we are doing in OPP core, but I still
>>> feel this better get merged with 2/5.
>> 
>> Ok, I see. Noted for RFCv2.
>> 
>> There will also be a big batch of changes for the compatible record
>> (omap3530->omap35xx, add omap34xx where needed) of ca. 10 board definition
>> DTS files. Should this then also become part of the new 2/5?
> 
> Compatible thing should be separate patch anyway, I was just talking
> about replacing opp-v1 with v2.

Ok, understood.

BR and thanks,
Nikolaus