On 30-10-20, 09:19, Lukasz Luba wrote: > How about dropping the DT binding, but just adding this new field into > dev_pm_opp? There will be no DT parsing code, just the get/set > functions, which will be used in SCMI patch 4/4 and in IPA? > That would not require to change any DT bindings. > I see. Just for your information SCMI supports 'Sustained Performance' > expressed in kHz. Even that doesn't sound great (but then I don't have any background of why that was added there). The problem is not about how do we get this data into the kernel (from DT or firmware), but why is it even required. I really feel that software can find the sustainable OPP by itself (which can keep changing). About moving it into the OPP core, I am open to getting something added there if it is really useful and if the OPP core is the best suited place to keep such data. Though I am not sure of that for this field right now. Is it ever going to be used by anyone else apart from IPA ? If not, what about adding a helper in IPA to set sustainable-freq for a device ? So only SCMI based platforms will be able to use this stuff ? That's very limited, isn't it ? I think we should still try to make it better for everyone by making the software smarter. It has so much data, the OPPs, the power it will consume (based on microvolt property?), the heat we produce from that (from thermal framework), etc. Perhaps building this information continuously at runtime based on when and how we hit the trip points ? So we know which is the right frequency where we can refrain from hitting the trip points. But may be I am asking too much :( -- viresh
