From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Viresh Kumar Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] PM / Domains: Implement domain performance states Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2017 11:00:07 +0530 Message-ID: <20170116053007.GA15930@vireshk-i7> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail-pg0-f51.google.com ([74.125.83.51]:34911 "EHLO mail-pg0-f51.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750764AbdAPFaL (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Jan 2017 00:30:11 -0500 Received: by mail-pg0-f51.google.com with SMTP id 194so12428660pgd.2 for ; Sun, 15 Jan 2017 21:30:11 -0800 (PST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org To: Rafael Wysocki , khilman@baylibre.com, ulf.hansson@linaro.org Cc: linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Stephen Boyd , Nishanth Menon , Vincent Guittot , robh+dt@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, lina.iyer@linaro.org, rnayak@codeaurora.org On 03-01-17, 16:36, Viresh Kumar wrote: > Hi, > > An earlier series[1] tried to implement bindings for PM domain > performance states. Rob Herring suggested that we can actually write the > supporting code first instead of bindings, as that will make things > easier to understand for all. > > The bindings [1] aren't discarded yet and this series is based on a > version of those only. The bindings are only used by the last patch, > which should not be applied and is only sent for completeness. > > All other patches can be reviewed/applied whenever the maintainers feel > they look good. > > > A brief summary of the problem this series is trying to solve: > > Some platforms have the capability to configure the performance state of > their Power Domains. The performance levels are represented by positive > integer values, a lower value represents lower performance state. > > We decided earlier that we should extend Power Domain framework to > support active state power management as well. The power-domains until > now were only concentrating on the idle state management of the device > and this needs to change in order to reuse the infrastructure of power > domains for active state management. > > The first 5 patches update the PM domain and QoS frameworks to support > that and the last one presents the front end interface to it. > > All the patches are tested by hacking the OPP core a bit for now. Ping ! -- viresh