Hi Maxime, On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 7:34 PM, Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 11:03:52AM +0200, Timo Sigurdsson wrote: >> Hi again, >> >> Julian Calaby schrieb am 03.08.2015 06:22: >> > My only real objection here is are there boards that can go down to >> > 0.9v and if so, won't this change make them less power efficient in >> > the almost-idle case? And are those power savings enough to justify >> > not accepting this patch? >> >> It will probably make those boards less power efficient, yes. On the >> other hand, boards that have their CPU regulator set to min. 1.0V might >> also draw more power because the lowest frequency is not available, >> even though the savings due to frequency are likely to be lower than >> the savings due to voltage. > > Guys, isn't this whole discussion a bit moot? We're not doing any kind > of power management but cpufreq, so maybe there's a lot more to do > before we actually can have these kind of arguments? > > Plus this OPP has never been used anyway, so this patch is not going > to increase the power consumption either. Oh, I didn't know that. Therefore I withdraw my objections, patch away! Thanks, -- Julian Calaby Email: julian.calaby@xxxxxxxxx Profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/julian.calaby/ -- 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
