On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 10:34 AM, J, KEERTHY <j-keerthy@xxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 3:21 AM, Kevin Hilman <khilman@xxxxxx> wrote: >> Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >>> On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 02:01:17PM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: >>>> Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >>> >>>> > But presumably these things should integrate somehow - for example, >>>> > should devfreq and cpufreq be providing inputs into what AVS is doing, >>>> > and if so how? >>> >>>> The way it is currently designed, cpufreq/devfreq/regulator layers don't >>>> need to know about AVS. >>> >>> Yes, and that was a part of my concern, but see below. >>> >>>> The higher-level layers only know about the "nominal" voltage. AVS >>>> hardware does automatic, adaptive, micro-adjustments around that nominal >>>> voltage, and these micro-adjustments are managed by the AVS hardware >>>> sending commands to the PMIC. (specifically, on OMAP, the AVS sensors >>>> provide inputs to the voltage processor (VP) which provide inputs to the >>>> voltage controller (VC) which sends commands to the PMIC[1].) >>> >>> Right, that's what I'd understood it to be. >>> >>>> The driver proposed here is primarily for initializing the various >>>> parameters/sensitivity/etc. of the AVS hardware, but the actual voltage >>>> adjustments are done in hardware by VC/VP. >>> >>> It's not just a driver, though - it's also creating this power/avs >>> thing, though now I look at the code rather than just its shape there's >>> not actually an abstraction being added here, it's mostly just straight >>> code motion of the arch/arm code that's there already. The changelog >>> and the shape of the code make it sound like this is intended to be >>> somewhat generic when really it's providing some OMAP specific tuning >>> for the device which is much less of a concern. >>> >>> I guess for now it's probably OK to just clarify in the documentation >>> and say that whoever adds the second driver has to work on making this >>> generic :) >> >> Agreed. >> >> In a different thread (which I can't seem to find now) we discussed this >> as well, so it just sounds like the changelog should clarify this a bit >> better. > > Kevin/Mark, > > Thanks for the feedback. I will add more documentation > to clarify this aspect. Please let me know if there are any more > things to be taken care of in this patch set. Hello Kevin, A gentle ping on this series. Any comments on this? > >> >> Kevin >> >>> This does also sound rather like it's in a similar area to the current >>> management work which Durgadoss R (CCed) was working on, though with a >>> slightly different application and in the OMAP case it's pretty much all >>> hidden in the external processor. >> > > > > -- > Regards and Thanks, > Keerthy -- Regards and Thanks, Keerthy _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
