[PATCH v3 1/2] cpufreq / OPP: Allow boost frequency to be looked up from device tree

Nishanth Menon nm at ti.com
Wed May 14 07:31:49 PDT 2014

On 05/14/2014 01:24 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 14 May 2014 11:39, Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski at samsung.com> wrote:
>> I agree with Nishanth here, that point 1 (as described by Viresh at
>> [*]) is a more scalable approach.
> The only reason why I wanted all that to be done at OPP level was to
> ensure if somebody else also needs it apart from cpufreq, they don't have
> to duplicate code and find it.. As it is present at a central place..
> But if no other code is going to look for that, it may just be fine as is..
If we eventually have a need beyond cpufreq (say devfreq) with similar
instances, then it makes sense to move it out to a generic place.
Either way, code implementation/duplication is a OS problem - and
should be looked at independent of the description in dts. If we feel
the description is valid hardware description (which, personally, I
do), then lets go to the next discussion point of where to put it -
generic or cpufreq specific (here, I have no preference), and finally
decide the implementation as necessary as a result of the description.

Nishanth Menon

More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list