Re: Regulators vis-a-vis Power Domains

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Apr 06, 2010 at 09:44:00PM +0100, Liam Girdwood wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-04-06 at 16:58 +0100, Ben Dooks wrote: 
> > On Sun, Apr 04, 2010 at 02:10:58PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:

> > > Nor does the SH stuff.  With the power domains of a CPU it often doesn't
> > > buy terribly much to use the regulator framework - the power domains are

> > I personally think there is merit to having the regulator framework at
> > least play a part in these, as is possible the powerdomains are being
> > fed from external regulators and/or power switches. I see it as good
> > way of using existing support to do useful work.

> I tend to agree here, although I think it's still early days for this
> technology and maybe some hybrid approach will eventually emerge.

Yes, once the control goes off chip the regulator framework definitely
makes sense.  It's only for things on the same die where there may be
less of a clear separation for the power supplies and where there's
likely to not be much more than simple power switching that it *might*
be worth doing something custom which more directly represents what's
going on.
_______________________________________________
linux-pm mailing list
linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm

[Index of Archives]     [Linux ACPI]     [Netdev]     [Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Wireless]     [CPU Freq]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux