[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 19:44:48 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>
Cc: Jonghwan Choi <jhbird.choi@...sung.com>,
Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.daniel@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] PM / OPP: Add support for descending order for
cpufreq table
On 5 May 2014 19:08, Nishanth Menon <nm@...com> wrote:
> With the brief history of the patch in linux-pm, I am unable to
> understand why not just use ceil/floor routines to pick up data the
> way you need it. It should not matter if we use an ordered list, or
> some other weird organization inside the storage. There are already
> accessors functions meant to precisely help with the case that is
> being tried here.
To be precise, for exynos they need the position of a frequency when
it is arranged in descending order. And they will simply write this position
in their clock controller later. For example, if frequencies are:
100 MHz, 200, 300, 400, 500, 600
Then they need to write 1 for 600, 2 for 500, 3 for 400, and so on..
I am not able to imaging how ceil/floor would help here.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists