[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAFBinCBYrNC+ULV6Y=77qogowkDZwM+H0bxOqPN4sT6q3krGfw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2020 13:38:00 +0100
From: Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@...glemail.com>
To: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
Cc: dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, alyssa@...enzweig.io,
steven.price@....com, tomeu.vizoso@...labora.com, robh@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, daniel@...ll.ch, airlied@...ux.ie,
linux-amlogic@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFT v1 1/3] drm/panfrost: enable devfreq based the
"operating-points-v2" property
Hi Robin,
On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 12:18 PM Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com> wrote:
>
> On 07/01/2020 11:06 pm, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> > Decouple the check to see whether we want to enable devfreq for the GPU
> > from dev_pm_opp_set_regulators(). This is preparation work for adding
> > back support for regulator control (which means we need to call
> > dev_pm_opp_set_regulators() before dev_pm_opp_of_add_table(), which
> > means having a check for "is devfreq enabled" that is not tied to
> > dev_pm_opp_of_add_table() makes things easier).
>
> Hmm, what about cases like the SCMI DVFS protocol where the OPPs are
> dynamically discovered rather than statically defined in DT?
where can I find such an example (Amlogic SoCs use SCPI instead of
SCMI, so I don't think that I have any board with SCMI support) or
some documentation?
(I could only find SCPI clock and CPU DVFS implementations, but no
generic "OPPs for any device" implementation)
Martin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists