[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210430084839.dwjey7qobtc7vi5q@gilmour>
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2021 10:48:39 +0200
From: Maxime Ripard <maxime@...no.tech>
To: Mike Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...el.com>,
David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>
Cc: Eric Anholt <eric@...olt.net>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Dave Stevenson <dave.stevenson@...pberrypi.com>,
Phil Elwell <phil@...pberrypi.com>,
Tim Gover <tim.gover@...pberrypi.com>,
Dom Cobley <dom@...pberrypi.com>, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] clk: Implement a clock request API
Hi Mike, Stephen,
On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 12:13:18PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is a follow-up of the discussion here:
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-clk/20210319150355.xzw7ikwdaga2dwhv@gilmour/
>
> This implements a mechanism to raise and lower clock rates based on consumer
> workloads, with an example of such an implementation for the RaspberryPi4 HDMI
> controller.
>
> There's a couple of things worth discussing:
>
> - The name is in conflict with clk_request_rate, and even though it feels
> like the right name to me, we should probably avoid any confusion
>
> - The code so far implements a policy of always going for the lowest rate
> possible. While we don't have an use-case for something else, this should
> maybe be made more flexible?
Ping?
Maxime
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists