All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>
Cc: 'Kukjin Kim' <kgene.kim@samsung.com>,
	'Jeongbae Seo' <jeongbae.seo@samsung.com>,
	linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	'Changhwan Youn' <chaos.youn@samsung.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, lrg@slimlogic.co.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: Add support samsung power domain
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2010 13:07:02 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100917120702.GB4322@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <007b01cb565d$db4376d0$91ca6470$%szyprowski@samsung.com>

On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 01:45:36PM +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote:

> The approach with merging power domains with clocks have some disadvantages.
> In some cases the clock gating and power gating should be distinguished.

This is not what I suggested.  I suggested using runtime PM instead of
the regulator API to manage blocks.

> Just assume an IP like a video codec. It has it's own internal state machine.
> It gets reset when the ip is power gated, but it is preserved during clock
> gating. The driver might want to do a clock gating when it is waiting for a
> new frame to decode, but should do power gating only when the device has

There's nothing stopping the drivers enabling and disabling the clocks
for themselves while they're active, all the rumtime PM stuff I've seen
for this does is ensure that the clocks are enabled and disabled when
the device is enabled and disabled.  This matches what you're saying
above - clearly, if the device is power gated there's no need to provide
a clock for it - and with aggressive runtime PM it's pretty much exactly
what a lot of devices end up needing.

> been closed. Having a set of fake clocks just for power gating imho doesn't
> look good.

Who said use the clock API?

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com (Mark Brown)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] regulator: Add support samsung power domain
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2010 13:07:02 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100917120702.GB4322@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <007b01cb565d$db4376d0$91ca6470$%szyprowski@samsung.com>

On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 01:45:36PM +0200, Marek Szyprowski wrote:

> The approach with merging power domains with clocks have some disadvantages.
> In some cases the clock gating and power gating should be distinguished.

This is not what I suggested.  I suggested using runtime PM instead of
the regulator API to manage blocks.

> Just assume an IP like a video codec. It has it's own internal state machine.
> It gets reset when the ip is power gated, but it is preserved during clock
> gating. The driver might want to do a clock gating when it is waiting for a
> new frame to decode, but should do power gating only when the device has

There's nothing stopping the drivers enabling and disabling the clocks
for themselves while they're active, all the rumtime PM stuff I've seen
for this does is ensure that the clocks are enabled and disabled when
the device is enabled and disabled.  This matches what you're saying
above - clearly, if the device is power gated there's no need to provide
a clock for it - and with aggressive runtime PM it's pretty much exactly
what a lot of devices end up needing.

> been closed. Having a set of fake clocks just for power gating imho doesn't
> look good.

Who said use the clock API?

  reply	other threads:[~2010-09-17 12:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-09-17  9:58 [PATCH] regulator: Add support samsung power domain Kukjin Kim
2010-09-17  9:58 ` Kukjin Kim
2010-09-17 11:30 ` Mark Brown
2010-09-17 11:30   ` Mark Brown
2010-09-17 11:45   ` Marek Szyprowski
2010-09-17 11:45     ` Marek Szyprowski
2010-09-17 12:07     ` Mark Brown [this message]
2010-09-17 12:07       ` Mark Brown
2010-09-20  6:12   ` Kukjin Kim
2010-09-20  6:12     ` Kukjin Kim
2010-09-20  9:50     ` Mark Brown
2010-09-20  9:50       ` Mark Brown

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20100917120702.GB4322@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main \
    --to=broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
    --cc=chaos.youn@samsung.com \
    --cc=jeongbae.seo@samsung.com \
    --cc=kgene.kim@samsung.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lrg@slimlogic.co.uk \
    --cc=m.szyprowski@samsung.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.