lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Jan]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH V2 0/2] PM / Domains / OPP: Introduce domain-performance-state binding
On 22-12-16, 12:14, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 04:26:17PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Some platforms have the capability to configure the performance state of
> > their Power Domains. The performance levels are represented by positive
> > integer values, a lower value represents lower performance state.
> >
> > We had some discussions about it in the past on the PM list [1], which is
> > followed by discussions during the LPC. The outcome of all that was that we
> > should extend Power Domain framework to support active state power management
> > as well.
> >
> > The power-domains until now were only concentrating on the idle state
> > management of the device and this needs to change in order to reuse the
> > infrastructure of power domains for active state management.
>
> >From a h/w perspective, are idle states really different from
> performance states?
>
> >
> > To get a complete picture of the proposed plan, following is what we
> > need to do:
> > - Create DT bindings to get domain performance state information for the
> > platforms.
>
> I would do this last so you can evolve things if you're not certain
> about what the bindings should look like. You can always start with
> things in the kernel and add to DT later.

Okay, I have just posted some code for this:

lkml.kernel.org/r/cover.1483439894.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org

Thanks for your inputs.

--
viresh

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-01-03 12:08    [W:0.114 / U:0.296 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site