From: Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
rafael@kernel.org, daniel.lezcano@linaro.org, nm@ti.com,
sboyd@kernel.org, mka@chromium.org, dianders@chromium.org,
robh+dt@kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
linux-pm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: power: add Energy Model bindings
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2022 10:03:38 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c83ae91b-6901-de2b-913e-b28af73c52fa@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220222094547.tgj4bciq6rez62nk@vireshk-i7>
On 2/22/22 09:45, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 22-02-22, 08:06, Lukasz Luba wrote:
>> I'm not sure if that would be flexible enough to meet the requirement:
>> power for each OPP might be different in one board vs. other board.
>
> Don't DT files overload values from board files all the time ? Why wouldn't the
> same apply for OPP table as well ?
In that SoC and family of the boards, there are no such examples.
It used to be popular in arm32 boards, but I'm not sure nowadays.
>
>> AFAIK the OPP definition is more SoC specific.
>
> This isn't about OPP definition as well, but just that if DT allows you to
> override or not. I think it will.
>
Redefining the whole OPP table, when the freq, voltage, interconnect,
and other old entries don't change isn't too messy?
As I said, I would prefer something lightweight, not redefining all
stuff from OPP in every board file.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-02-22 10:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-02-21 22:51 [RFC][PATCH 0/2] Introduce 'advanced' Energy Model in DT Lukasz Luba
2022-02-21 22:51 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: power: add Energy Model bindings Lukasz Luba
2022-02-22 3:03 ` Viresh Kumar
2022-02-22 8:06 ` Lukasz Luba
2022-02-22 9:45 ` Viresh Kumar
2022-02-22 10:03 ` Lukasz Luba [this message]
2022-02-22 10:12 ` Viresh Kumar
2022-02-22 11:03 ` Lukasz Luba
2022-02-22 11:15 ` Viresh Kumar
2022-02-22 11:23 ` Lukasz Luba
2022-02-22 14:22 ` Rob Herring
2022-02-22 14:30 ` Lukasz Luba
2022-02-21 22:51 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/2] opp: Add support for 'advanced' Energy Model in DT Lukasz Luba
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=c83ae91b-6901-de2b-913e-b28af73c52fa@arm.com \
--to=lukasz.luba@arm.com \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=dianders@chromium.org \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mka@chromium.org \
--cc=nm@ti.com \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=sboyd@kernel.org \
--cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
/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