On 2018-08-03 04:14, Stephen Boyd wrote:
Quoting Amit Nischal (2018-07-30 04:28:56)
On 2018-07-25 12:28, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>
> Ok. Sounds good! Is the rate range call really needed? It can't be
> determined in the PLL code with some table or avoided by making sure
> GPU
> uses OPP table with only approved frequencies?
>
Currently fabia PLL code does not have any table to check this and
intention
was to avoid relying on the client to call set_rate with only approved
frequencies so we have added the set_rate_range() call in the GPUCC
driver
in order to set the rate range.
But GPU will use OPP so it doesn't seem like it really buys us anything
here. And it really doesn't matter when the clk driver implementation
doesn't use the min/max to clamp the values of the round_rate() call.
Is
that being done here? I need to double check. I would be more convinced
if the implementation was looking at min/max to constrain the rate
requested.
So our understanding is that GPU(client) driver will always call the
set_rate with approved frequencies only and we can completely rely on
the
client. Is our understanding is correct?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-clk" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
