[PATCH V4 1/3] OPP: Redefine bindings to overcome shortcomings
Viresh Kumar
viresh.kumar at linaro.org
Tue May 12 22:05:59 PDT 2015
On 12-05-15, 11:04, Nishanth Menon wrote:
> Just curious -> is'nt it better to just have min<->max range? binding
> as it stands right now is open to interpretation as to what will be
> attempted and in what sequence? with a valid min, target or max -
> is'nt it more power efficient always to go for a "min" than a target?
>
> Further, min<->max implies anywhere in that range and is more
> consistent with "regulator like" description.
It came out after some discussions on the list, you may want to go
through that.
https://lists.linaro.org/pipermail/linaro-kernel/2015-January/019844.html
> True. one option might be to allow for vendor specific property
> extensions - that will let vendors add in additional quirky data
> custom to their SoCs as needed.
Yeah, I am planning to support them.
--
viresh
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list