[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20161118030636.GA3110@vireshk-i7>
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2016 08:36:36 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: Rafael Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net>, nm@...com, sboyd@...eaurora.org
Cc: linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>, robh@...nel.org,
d-gerlach@...com, broonie@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 0/9] PM / OPP: Multiple regulator support
On 26-10-16, 12:02, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Some platforms (like TI) have complex DVFS configuration for CPU
> devices, where multiple regulators are required to be configured to
> change DVFS state of the device. This was explained well by Nishanth
> earlier [1].
>
> One of the major complaints around multiple regulators case was that the
> DT isn't responsible in any way to represent the ordering in which
> multiple supplies need to be programmed, before or after frequency
> change. It was considered in this patch and such information is left to
> the platform specific OPP driver now, which can register its own
> opp_set_rate() callback with the OPP core and the OPP core will then
> call it during DVFS.
>
> The patches are tested on Exynos5250 (Dual A15). I have hacked around DT
> and code to pass values for multiple regulators and verified that they
> are all properly read by the kernel (using debugfs interface).
>
> Dave Gerlach has already tested it on the real TI platforms and it works
> well for him.
>
> This is rebased over: linux-next branch in the PM tree.
>
> V2->V3:
> - The last patch is new
> - Removed a debug leftover pr_info() message
> - Renamed few names as s/set_rate/set_opp
> - Removed a TODO comment (as it is done now with this series)
> - created struct for min_uV and max_uV
> - kerneldoc comments for structures in pm_opp.h
> - s/const char */const char * const
> - use kasprintf()
> - Some more minor reformatting
> - More Ack/RBY tags added
Hi guys,
Can we please get this series reviewed quickly and come to a conclusion? It has
already taken a lot of time getting this merged and the present code seems to be
the best possible shot we have, AFAIU.
--
viresh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists