On 7/18/2020 12:26 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 11:52 PM Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 7/17/2020 1:29 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 11:12:16AM +0530, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
Add an optional power domain which when specified can be used for
setting the performance state of Venus.
The h/w suddenly grew a new power island/domain? Seems like an abuse of
power-domains...
The power-domain always existed, we have just managed to survive without
having venus support DVFS and have the domain always be at a high performance
level (set statically by boot code)
Now, if we care to do DVFS and support better PM on the SoC, its important
for the devices to manage this additional power domain (and dynamically
scale it)
That said, if the name 'opp-pd' makes it look like a software construct,
like Bjorn mentioned, I am fine to give it a real name like 'cx-pd'
Does that sound good?
He suggested 'cx' as '-pd' would be redundant. I have no idea what
'cx' means, but fine.
PS: Like I mentioned earlier [1], cx is a shared power island,
not a power island specific to this block, and definitely not a software
pm-domain construct.
Put this context/detail into your patches. Assume I don't remember
what happened last week.
Thanks Rob, will do when I re-post shortly.
Unfortunately, gmail seems to have no way to filter on unread mails in
reply to my replies and doesn't move the thread up in 'Sent' filter,
so older threads get lost.
Rob
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1241077/
--
QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member
of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation
