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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Tue, 9 May 2017 10:59:21 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <>
To:     Sudeep Holla <>
Cc:     Rob Herring <>, Rafael Wysocki <>,, Kevin Hilman <>,
        Viresh Kumar <>, Nishanth Menon <>,
        Stephen Boyd <>,,,,
        Vincent Guittot <>,,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH V6 1/9] PM / OPP: Introduce "power-domain-opp" property

On 08-05-17, 14:57, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> Yes, I followed the thread and figured that out. But Rajendra also
> raised "What if the microcontroller firmware maps the performance-index
> to voltage but expects linux to scale the frequency? There is no way to
> specify a performance-index *and* a frequency for a OPP now I guess? So
> this needs to be addressd now IIUC.

No, he misunderstood it. He was saying that the domain needs a performance-index
and the device needs freq-scaling, how do we do that? He thought that there will
be just one OPP table for the device here, but we will actually have two and
that would work.

> So as Kevin pointed out, we need to experiment and look at all
> possibilities before finalizing the bindings. Better to have examples
> for all these and describe how bindings are be used including how to
> distinguish between these use-case from the bindings if it's not implicit.

Yeah, I have some doubts on how we are going to implement that and looking for
more input from him.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists