From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Viresh Kumar Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] ARM: Exynos: switch to using generic cpufreq driver for Exynos4x12 Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2015 16:10:44 +0530 Message-ID: <20150803104044.GB21529@linux> References: <1438368557-2352-1-git-send-email-b.zolnierkie@samsung.com> <5201904.0cZWHobiJs@amdc1976> <20150803102926.GA21529@linux> <4532306.AVvo5hem3c@amdc1976> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4532306.AVvo5hem3c@amdc1976> Sender: linux-samsung-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz Cc: Thomas Abraham , Sylwester Nawrocki , Michael Turquette , Kukjin Kim , Kukjin Kim , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Tomasz Figa , Lukasz Majewski , Heiko Stuebner , Chanwoo Choi , Kevin Hilman , Javier Martinez Canillas , Tobias Jakobi , Anand Moon , linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Javier Martinez Canillas , Zhang Rui , Eduardo Valentin List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org On 03-08-15, 12:36, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > I would really like it to be dependency not an option (+ I think > that ideally it should be checked at runtime, IOW we should be > checking from cpufreq-dt driver if the thermal support is enabled > before enabling boost support). I don't think boost has any dependency on thermal support. Yeah, it may be true for your platform but we can't force it. People might have different algorithms to control boost modes, thermal is just one option they may look at. For few, enabling boost may not be a thermal issue, but power. So, they want to allow it only when they want, but that wouldn't burn their chip. So, a platform can choose how it wants to have it. :) -- viresh