Re: Alternative Concept [Was: Re: [RFC] CPUFreq PowerOP integration, Intro 0/3]

[Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>]

Hi!

> F) So, how would this work for OMAP1?
> 
> Let's limit it, to keep it somewhat simple, to the values contained in your
> "struct pm_core_point" for OMAP:
> 
> 	int cpu_vltg; /* voltage in mV */
> 	int dpll;     /* in KHz */
> 	int cpu;      /* CPU frequency in KHz */
> 	int tc;       /* in KHz */
> 	int per;      /* in KHz */
> 	int dsp;      /* in KHz */
> 	int dspmmu;   /* in KHz */
> 	int lcd;      /* in KHz */
> 
> and let's also add a
> 
> 	int i_am_special;

Hehe, nice idea.

> I think that this might be much easier to implement than your PowerOP /
> operating points / PM core / PowerOP - cpufreq interaction patches. As a
> matter of fact, some parts of your operating points table infrastructure
> may be usable for the concept outlined above. So, what do you think? What
> does everyone else involved think about this alternative approach?

Looks okay to me. Unlike powerop design, this actually works for
everyone.
-- 
Thanks for all the (sleeping) penguins.