public inbox for linux-omap@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kevin Hilman <khilman@deeprootsystems.com>
To: Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>
Cc: linux-omap <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Murray <amurray@mpc-data.co.uk>,
	Romit Dasgupta <romit@ti.com>, Benoit Cousson <b-cousson@ti.com>
Subject: Re: [PM-WIP-OPP] [PATCH v2] omap3: pm: cpufreq: populate l3 opp1 again
Date: Thu, 04 Feb 2010 11:35:14 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87636c4wwd.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1264711121-16873-1-git-send-email-nm@ti.com> (Nishanth Menon's message of "Thu\, 28 Jan 2010 14\:38\:41 -0600")

Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com> writes:

> We had removed the frequency for OPP1 L3 when we used to use frequency
> to enable/disable frequencies. It is better to populate the same
> instead of confusing future readers of the code. The OPP1 remains
> disabled as explained in the discussion.
>
> Discussion: http://marc.info/?t=126453821900001&r=1&w=2
>
> Cc: Andrew Murray <amurray@mpc-data.co.uk>
> Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@deeprootsystems.com>
> Cc: Romit Dasgupta <romit@ti.com>
>
> Signed-off-by: Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>
> Signed-off-by: Benoit Cousson <b-cousson@ti.com>
> ---
>
> Ref:
> v1: http://marc.info/?t=126465729200002&r=1&w=2
>
> Adding Signed-off-by Benoit to attribute the comment message which I
> "borrowed" from his excellent explanation in the mail thread and put
> as comment.

Thanks, pulled into pm-wip-opp branch.

Kevin

>  arch/arm/mach-omap2/cpufreq34xx.c |   11 +++++++++--
>  1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/cpufreq34xx.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/cpufreq34xx.c
> index 07873e8..9882451 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/cpufreq34xx.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/cpufreq34xx.c
> @@ -42,8 +42,15 @@ static struct omap_opp_def __initdata omap34xx_mpu_rate_table[] = {
>  };
>  
>  static struct omap_opp_def __initdata omap34xx_l3_rate_table[] = {
> -	/* OPP1 */
> -	OMAP_OPP_DEF(false, 0, 975000),
> +	/*
> +	 * OPP1 - 41.5 MHz is disabled because: The voltage for that OPP is
> +	 * almost the same than the one at 83MHz thus providing very little
> +	 * gain for the power point of view. In term of energy it will even
> +	 * increase the consumption due to the very negative performance
> +	 * impact that frequency will do to the MPU and the whole system in
> +	 * general.
> +	 */
> +	OMAP_OPP_DEF(false, 41500000, 975000),
>  	/* OPP2 */
>  	OMAP_OPP_DEF(true, 83000000, 1050000),
>  	/* OPP3 */
> -- 
> 1.6.3.3

      reply	other threads:[~2010-02-04 19:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-01-28 20:38 [PM-WIP-OPP] [PATCH v2] omap3: pm: cpufreq: populate l3 opp1 again Nishanth Menon
2010-02-04 19:35 ` Kevin Hilman [this message]

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=87636c4wwd.fsf@deeprootsystems.com \
    --to=khilman@deeprootsystems.com \
    --cc=amurray@mpc-data.co.uk \
    --cc=b-cousson@ti.com \
    --cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nm@ti.com \
    --cc=romit@ti.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox