[PATCH V2] cpufreq: ARM big LITTLE: Add generic cpufreq driver and its DT glue
Guennadi Liakhovetski
g.liakhovetski at gmx.de
Fri Mar 8 01:11:28 EST 2013
Hi Viresh
On Fri, 8 Mar 2013, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 8 March 2013 05:56, Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski at gmx.de> wrote:
> > I like generic drivers :)
>
> Me too :)
>
> > cpufreq-cpu0 is yet another such generic
> > (cpufreq) driver. Now, comparing the functionality of the two:
>
> Great!!
>
> > we see, that this driver "only" switches CPU clock frequencies. Whereas
> > the cpufreq-cpu0 driver also manipulates a regulator (if available)
> > directly. I understand, power-saving is also an important consideration
> > for big.LITTLE systems. So, I presume, you plan to implement voltage
> > switching in cpufreq notifiers?
>
> So the platform on which we are currently testing these is ARM TC2 Soc
> and this switching is done by the firmware instead. And so didn't went
> for regulator hookups initially.. Obviously in future regulator hookups would
> find some space in this driver but not required for now.
>
> > Now, my question is: is this (notifier)
> > actually the preferred method and the cpufreq-cpu0 driver is doing it
> > "wrongly?"
>
> What notifiers are you talking about? I believe using the regulator framework
> is the right way of doing this. And that would be part of this code later on.
Also in your driver you're doing
cpufreq_notify_transition(&freqs, CPUFREQ_PRECHANGE);
...
cpufreq_notify_transition(&freqs, CPUFREQ_POSTCHANGE);
So, theoretically you could install such notifiers to adjust CPU voltages
(using regulators too). But adding regulator calls directly to the driver
would make it consistent with cpufreq-cpu0.c, so, if this doesn't violate
any concepts, I think, it would be good to add those when suitable systems
appear.
Thanks
Guennadi
---
Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D.
Freelance Open-Source Software Developer
http://www.open-technology.de/
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list