[PATCH v2 2/2] [RFC] CPUFreq: Add support for cpu-perf-dependencies

Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar at linaro.org
Mon Oct 12 00:19:51 EDT 2020


On 09-10-20, 16:28, Nicola Mazzucato wrote:
> @Viresh
> I am sorry I misread your reply earlier thus I did not pay attention on that
> property.
> And yes, it is exactly as how you have described :)
> In the case 1 (different opps, different clk) and case 2 (same opps, different
> clk) we provide v/f points. In case 3, we add 'opp-shared' property in opp table
> to tell that the cpus with this opp table share a clock line.
> 
> Here are my thoughts on this 3rd case:
> - the information of 'share the same clock line' comes correctly from DT as it's
> purely a hw description. The same applies for cpu-perf-dependencies.
> - because the opp table can come from any firmware, we won't have any opp table
> in DT, thus we won't be able to take advantage of 'opp-shared' I am afraid.

I wonder if we should use an empty OPP table just for parsing this
information.

-- 
viresh



More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list