lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Feb]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/6] PM / Domains: Implement domain performance states
On 16-01-17, 11:00, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 03-01-17, 16:36, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > An earlier series[1] tried to implement bindings for PM domain
> > performance states. Rob Herring suggested that we can actually write the
> > supporting code first instead of bindings, as that will make things
> > easier to understand for all.
> >
> > The bindings [1] aren't discarded yet and this series is based on a
> > version of those only. The bindings are only used by the last patch,
> > which should not be applied and is only sent for completeness.
> >
> > All other patches can be reviewed/applied whenever the maintainers feel
> > they look good.
> >
> >
> > A brief summary of the problem this series is trying to solve:
> >
> > 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 decided earlier 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.
> >
> > The first 5 patches update the PM domain and QoS frameworks to support
> > that and the last one presents the front end interface to it.
> >
> > All the patches are tested by hacking the OPP core a bit for now.
>
> Ping !

Ping !!

--
viresh

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-02-06 06:36    [W:0.087 / U:0.664 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site