On 13-04-17, 14:43, Sudeep Holla wrote: > Interesting. My understand of power domain and in particular power > domain performance was that it would control both. The abstract number > you introduce would hide clocks and regulators. > > But if the concept treats it just as yet another regulator, we do we > need these at all. Why don't we relate this performance to regulator > values and be done with it ? > > Sorry if I am missing to understand something here. I would look this as > replacement for both clocks and regulators, something similar to ACPI > CPPC. If not, it looks unnecessary to me with the information I have got > so far. I kind of answered that in the other email. Some background may be good here. So Qcom tried to solve all this with virtual regulators, but the problem was that they need to talk in terms of integer values (1, 2, 3..) and not voltages and so they can't use the regulator framework straight away. And so we are doing all this. -- 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
