From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com (Mark Brown)
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2010 10:09:14 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 5/5] ARM: S5PV210: Initial CPUFREQ Support
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTine-RPFqd1zp-vu4xRaidhngU0t3hC3SP_bXfWw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1279184768-28971-5-git-send-email-myungjoo.ham@samsung.com>
	<1279184768-28971-6-git-send-email-myungjoo.ham@samsung.com>
	<20100715115942.GA15919@sirena.org.uk>
	<AANLkTinrrXlh1GQ178_NzwWt5luO_1mdfIGy6G2ZNbPH@mail.gmail.com>
	<20100716081707.GA9082@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main>
	<AANLkTikYX6N7q3lT5ZzXh3RQnGss39eGhSrfC9blqoF_@mail.gmail.com>
	<20100716084231.GF9082@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main>
	<AANLkTikNCOjOSVlcBv99DuJEdPtQHmKpC8Cs60rQz1r3@mail.gmail.com>
	<20100716093710.GH9082@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main>
	<AANLkTine-RPFqd1zp-vu4xRaidhngU0t3hC3SP_bXfWw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20100719090914.GC15693@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 09:40:24AM +0900, MyungJoo Ham wrote:

> Uh oh.. I didn't mean that the default ramp time is the "required" or
> "suggested" by the PMIC, but I meant that it is required by the CPU to
> execute instructions without possible CPU lockups due to lower voltage

You're still missing my point here.  What I'm saying is that by using
the slower default ramp rate of the PMIC you're making the length of the
stall in execution introduced by waiting for the ramp to complete more
severe than it needs to be, thus increasing the impact on the system and
the need to do work in software to mitigate that.  Reducing the ramp
time should result in improved system performance.