[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220610082231.nyywda5j6c5tr7tv@vireshk-i7>
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2022 13:52:31 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
Cc: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>, Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Viresh Kumar <vireshk@...nel.org>, Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>,
Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>,
Avri Altman <avri.altman@....com>,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Taniya Das <tdas@...eaurora.org>,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 4/6] PM: opp: allow control of multiple clocks
On 01-06-22, 13:23, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> In general this looks reasonable and matches how the UFS gears should be
> modeled. It does not match how UFS drivers implemented the clock
> scaling, but that's the internal problem of UFS drivers. They scale the
> clocks only max or min, even though there are multiple gears in between.
> The new approach looks therefore appropriate.
Hi,
I have finally finished working on this and sent the last patchset and
cc'd you. You can also directly use opp/linux-next branch for the
same, which will land in linux-next as well.
Thanks.
--
viresh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists