[lkml]   [2017]   [Apr]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH V4 1/9] PM / OPP: Allow OPP table to be used for power-domains

On 17/04/17 06:33, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 13-04-17, 14:43, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>> Interesting. My understand of power domain and in particular power
>> domain performance was that it would control both. The abstract number
>> you introduce would hide clocks and regulators.
>> But if the concept treats it just as yet another regulator, we do we
>> need these at all. Why don't we relate this performance to regulator
>> values and be done with it ?
>> Sorry if I am missing to understand something here. I would look this as
>> replacement for both clocks and regulators, something similar to ACPI
>> CPPC. If not, it looks unnecessary to me with the information I have got
>> so far.
> I kind of answered that in the other email.
> Some background may be good here. So Qcom tried to solve all this with virtual
> regulators, but the problem was that they need to talk in terms of integer
> values (1, 2, 3..) and not voltages and so they can't use the regulator
> framework straight away. And so we are doing all this.

Was it posted externally ? Was there any objections for that approach ?
IMO that's better approach but if I am late to the party, I would like
to read through the discussions that happened on it(if any)


 \ /
  Last update: 2017-04-18 18:04    [W:0.076 / U:26.676 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site