linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] cpufreq: tegra: Re-model Tegra cpufreq driver

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <52B28ACD.5080204@nvidia.com>
Date:	Thu, 19 Dec 2013 13:57:33 +0800
From:	bilhuang <bilhuang@...dia.com>
To:	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
CC:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
	"thierry.reding@...il.com" <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"cpufreq@...r.kernel.org" <cpufreq@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org" <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] cpufreq: tegra: Re-model Tegra cpufreq driver

On 12/19/2013 01:29 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 19 December 2013 10:56, bilhuang <bilhuang@...dia.com> wrote:
>> I'm not sure virtual regulator for CPU is a good idea, in addition to that,
>> we don't have a single SoC OPP table, we need several which are speedo-id
>> and process-id dependant, but generic cpufreq-cpu0 is assuming there is only
>> one statically
>
> Can't that be handled via DT ?
I don't think it can be handled via DT unless we separate DTB according 
to different CPU speedo/process-id but that is not a good idea.
>
>> for some SoC the frequency table is not fixed, they are
>> created at runtime combining our fast and slow CPU frequency table and dvfs
>> table. So I'm really not sure is it worth adding so many tweaks in order to
>> use the generic cpufreq-cpu0 driver.
>
> Hmm, maybe I got confused because I don't have a clear picture in my mind.
> It might be better to go ahead with your implementation for now and after
> everything is set, we can choose to use cpufreq-cpu0 if it is worth it.
>
This makes more sense to me, thanks.
> --
> viresh
>

--
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/