> -----Original Message----- > From: Menon, Nishanth > Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 2:04 PM > To: Dasgupta, Romit > Cc: Premi, Sanjeev; Cousson, Benoit; Kevin H; linux-omap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: Question on OPP table handling > > Dasgupta, Romit had written, on 10/06/2009 07:00 AM, the following: > >> Couple of opinions on why a list with disabled/invalid marker might not > >> make sense as a grand unified OPP table: > >> a) it is no better than a list implementation > >> b) it is a waste of memory. > > [Romit] Put all the OPP tables for different OPPs in __initdata. Copy > the runtime detected CPU's OPP table in memory. Others get discarded! > > > I like this approach.. takers? > I think it is not enough. Some OPPs will be selected based on runtime CPU detection, but some OPPs might be disabled dynamically for some usecase depending of external parameters. Regards, Benoit -- 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
