On 03/29/2016 07:41 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > Hi, > > * Nishanth Menon <nm@xxxxxx> [160329 16:36]: >> Lets get somethings out of the way here: OMAP5 is NOT OMAP4. Other than >> the technologies that are completely different, there has been quiet a >> bit of descopes on OMAP5 Vs previous generation SoCs. Further, a ton of >> effort in productizing OMAP3 and 4, which is completely missing in >> OMAP5. Almost most of power management as has been functional during >> OMAP3/4 has been descoped - making it more inline with DRA7 is the best >> hope of moving things forward on OMAP5. > > Yeah well, like you say, there is still quite a bit of PM related > synergy between am57xx and omap5. Many of the devices are the same and > are using same PM runtime for clock gating also on am57xx. yes, overall principles are similar, but there are lot of broken handshaking, issues that were identified, but decided to be descoped rather than be dug into etc. when people try to enable all dynamic dependencies and some IP fails.. well.. yes, it was descoped... there are lots of interesting stories there.. >> From TI's perspective, despite a few of us community involved folks, >> there is very less interest in investigating all the missing features on >> OMAP5 at this point in time. > > Right, so for omap5 PM, it's mostly the omap5 PRCM related parts that > are missing. And am57xx is not using PRCM which explains the TI > perspective. > That is not accurate. AM57xx/DRA7 use PRCM. it is Keystone generation SoCs that dont use PRCM. > So nothing stopping the community people from adding PM support for > omap5 as needed and as long as there is interest. As long as people follow what the latest TRM and TI documentation states, there is nothing to prevent us from going ahead. The trouble is when we try to enable things like "Smart reflex AVS", or "OFF mode" or similar stuff -> those are gone by long ago. there are lot of assumptions that people who actually test every sample make when certain things get "descoped" - enabling things and just because it works on one sample and posting "it works" patches is just pure headache to deal with for the rest of us. as long as we all are in agreement to stay within the constraints of TI documentation, we are all good.. any issues there of will be something to deal over e2e.ti.com - though I must warn ahead of time that certain domains might not get attention that might be desired for things to move ahead. -- Regards, Nishanth Menon -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
