Hi Stephen, Mike, On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 11:35:12AM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote: > Hi, > > This is a follow-up of the discussion here: > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-clk/20210319150355.xzw7ikwdaga2dwhv@gilmour/ > > This implements a mechanism to raise and lower clock rates based on consumer > workloads, with an example of such an implementation for the RaspberryPi4 HDMI > controller. > > There's a couple of things worth discussing: > > - The name is in conflict with clk_request_rate, and even though it feels > like the right name to me, we should probably avoid any confusion > > - The code so far implements a policy of always going for the lowest rate > possible. While we don't have an use-case for something else, this should > maybe be made more flexible? This has been posted around 8 monthes ago now: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20210413101320.321584-1-maxime@xxxxxxxxxx/ I haven't had any review on this, and I'm struggling to see how we can move forward. Given your initial reaction, I'm guessing you were a bit reluctant at first with the approach, if so, can you share *any* direction in which I should amend that series to support similar features? Maxime
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
