On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 at 12:31, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 at 05:13, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On 10-07-24, 15:51, Ulf Hansson wrote: > > > I think this should work, but in this case we seem to need a similar > > > thing for dev_pm_opp_set_rate(). > > > > We don't go to that path for genpd's I recall. Do we ? For genpd's, > > since there is no freq, we always call _set_opp(). > > You are right! Although, maybe it's still preferred to do it in > _set_opp() as it looks like the code would be more consistent? No? No matter how we do this, we end up enforcing OPPs for genpds. It means that we may be requesting the same performance-level that we have already requested for the device. Of course genpd manages this, but it just seems a bit in-efficient to mee. Or maybe this isn't a big deal as consumer drivers should end up doing this anyway? Kind regards Uffe
