On 19-10-21, 15:58, Ulf Hansson wrote: > To me, this looks doable from a genpd provider too. Of course, we may > need to extend the genpd interface a bit to make it fit well for this > new use case, of course. And I am happy to help, if that is needed. > > One thing though; how is the aggregation of the OPP votes expected to > be done? Is that entirely managed by FW - or is it expected that the > cpufreq driver, in this case, keeps track of the aggregated votes too? In case of cpufreq drivers, the voting is never required since there is always a single request from cpufreq core to change the freq for a group of devices (CPUs). And these genpds will only have a bunch of CPUs to serve. > Don't get me wrong, I am not pushing for these DT bindings to be > deprecated (at least not yet :-)), but I would certainly like to > understand more about them. In the end, we haven't walked this far, by > extending genpd and inventing new DT bindings to enable it to support > "performance management" - then just to just forget about them again. > :-) I am happy to move to genpd if this can be done in a sane way there :) -- viresh
