On 22-12-16, 12:14, Rob Herring wrote: > On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 04:26:17PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > Hello, > > > > Some platforms have the capability to configure the performance state of > > their Power Domains. The performance levels are represented by positive > > integer values, a lower value represents lower performance state. > > > > We had some discussions about it in the past on the PM list [1], which is > > followed by discussions during the LPC. The outcome of all that was that we > > should extend Power Domain framework to support active state power management > > as well. > > > > The power-domains until now were only concentrating on the idle state > > management of the device and this needs to change in order to reuse the > > infrastructure of power domains for active state management. > > >From a h/w perspective, are idle states really different from > performance states? > > > > > To get a complete picture of the proposed plan, following is what we > > need to do: > > - Create DT bindings to get domain performance state information for the > > platforms. > > I would do this last so you can evolve things if you're not certain > about what the bindings should look like. You can always start with > things in the kernel and add to DT later. Okay, I have just posted some code for this: lkml.kernel.org/r/cover.1483439894.git.viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx Thanks for your inputs. -- viresh -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
