[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201012160633.GG16519@bogus>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 17:06:33 +0100
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Cc: Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@....com>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
Nicola Mazzucato <nicola.mazzucato@....com>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Viresh Kumar <vireshk@...nel.org>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
Chris Redpath <chris.redpath@....com>,
Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] [RFC] CPUFreq: Add support for
cpu-perf-dependencies
On Thu, Oct 08, 2020 at 05:57:23PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 5:03 PM Ionela Voinescu <ionela.voinescu@....com> wrote:
[...]
>
> > The PSD domains (ACPI) and the new DT binding will tell
> > which CPUs are actually in the same clock domain for whomever is
> > interested, despite those CPUs not being in the same policy.
>
> And this information hasn't been used so far in those cases.
>
Indeed, do you see that will change for new heterogeneous CPUs ? Are there
any plans to use EAS on those ?
--
Regards,
Sudeep
Powered by blists - more mailing lists