[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150527080516.GS11677@x1>
Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 09:05:16 +0100
From: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
To: Richard Fitzgerald <rf@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
patches@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/1] mfd: arizona: Export functions to control
subsystem DVFS
On Tue, 26 May 2015, Richard Fitzgerald wrote:
> On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 04:29:42PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 02:52:05PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> >
> > > Shouldn't this DVFS dump live in drivers/cpufreq?
> >
> > cpufreq is specifically for CPUs (with the governors and everything) and
> > has its own problems here. There is devfreq which was crated for this
> > sort of thing (though more on a SoC level) though, not sure if it's a
> > good fit or not.
>
> devfreq does look as though it's at the wrong sort of level. Also looks
> like it could introduce more complexity than is justified.
>
> An simpler alternative if we don't want this code in mfd is that
> potentially this DVFS handling could be moved into the SoC codec driver.
If the DVFS configuration is specific to the CODEC, then yes, that
makes sense.
Sorry for making this awkward, but I'm starting to get pretty crabby
about MFD being a convenient dumping ground for misfit functionality.
I also understand that this isn't just down to you.
--
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
--
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