From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kevin Hilman Subject: Re: [PM-WIP-OPP][PATCH] OPP: Introduces enum for addressing different OPP types Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 11:26:22 -0800 Message-ID: <87wrzn86qp.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> References: <1263299979.1536.7.camel@boson> <87iqb7fdgf.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> <74583B8642AB8841B30447520659FCA9E73BDA08@dnce01.ent.ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail-yw0-f176.google.com ([209.85.211.176]:49067 "EHLO mail-yw0-f176.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753686Ab0ALT01 (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jan 2010 14:26:27 -0500 Received: by ywh6 with SMTP id 6so22765199ywh.4 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 11:26:25 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <74583B8642AB8841B30447520659FCA9E73BDA08@dnce01.ent.ti.com> (Benoit Cousson's message of "Tue\, 12 Jan 2010 18\:36\:37 +0100") Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: "Cousson, Benoit" Cc: "Dasgupta, Romit" , "Menon, Nishanth" , "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" "Cousson, Benoit" writes: > Hi Kevin, > >>From: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-omap- >>owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Kevin Hilman >>Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 6:19 PM >>To: Dasgupta, Romit >>Cc: Menon, Nishanth; linux-omap@vger.kernel.org >>Subject: Re: [PM-WIP-OPP][PATCH] OPP: Introduces enum for addressing >>different OPP types >> >>Romit Dasgupta writes: >> >>> Introduces enum for identifying OPP types. This helps in querying the OPP >>> layer by passing the type of OPP (enum types) and gets away from >>maintaining >>> the pointer to the OPP data list outside the OPP layer. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Romit Dasgupta >> >>I like this idea... but I have some questions about how we should >>cleanly handle SMP and future SoCs. > > Well, it is better than what we have today, but maybe not super > scalable for next device. This information is completely device > dependant and should not be in a plat-omap file. In that case, it > will be tricky to have an enum per devices because it will prevent > multiple omap build. That for that reason that I think we might use > hwmod to identify the relevant scalable IPs, instead of yet another > identifier for something that is IP related. OK. Let's take this approach for now, and after hwmods get stabilized/merged we can consider alternate per-SoC ways to handle this. Thanks, Kevin