[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9e76cfc8-c062-4692-bed7-6d30e8628587@linaro.org>
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2023 11:07:53 +0100
From: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc: Viresh Kumar <vireshk@...nel.org>, Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
Stephan Gerhold <stephan.gerhold@...nkonzept.com>,
Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/3] OPP: Level zero is valid
On 31.10.2023 06:26, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 30-10-23, 19:47, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>> On 30.10.2023 11:24, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>>> The level zero can be used by some OPPs to drop performance state vote
>>> for the device. It is perfectly fine to allow the same.
>>>
>>> _set_opp_level() considers it as an invalid value currently and returns
>>> early.
>
>> So, currently if the device is PM-enabled, but OPP requirements are lifted,
>
> How exactly are the OPP requirements lifted ?
>
> By calling dev_pm_opp_set_opp(dev, NULL) ?
>
> This will work fine even without this commit.
Ok!
>
>> is the API currently internally stuck at the last non-zero level?
>>
>> Just trying to understand if this could fix some silent issues
>
> Also the issue I am trying to solve here came in existence only during the 6.7
> merge window and doesn't affect the genpds linked via required-opps. And this
> commit will soon be merged.
Ack, thanks
Konrad
Powered by blists - more mailing lists