On Fri, 2013-03-15 at 20:33 +0800, Ulf Hansson wrote: > I guess you did not fully got what I meant with "dvfs clock type". It > will not affect the clock API. But instead the dvfs is handled by > implementing a specific clk hw type. So the same thing is accomplished > as with clk notifiers, no changes should be needed to device drivers. > > The difference is only that no notifiers will be needed, and all the > dvfs stuff will be handled in the clk hw instead. It will mean that we > will bundle dvfs stuff into the clock drivers, instead of separating > the code outside the clock drivers. But, on the other hand no > notifiers will be needed. > Oh yes I misunderstand your origin point, but my thought is using existing devfreq framework as frequency/voltage policy driver instead of creating another one in clock driver and that's why I think we need the notifier work.
By the way, some centralized DVFS implementation like Tegra's VDD_CORE rail has association with tens of clocks which will need to be taken care specially if we're doing those in clock driver I think. > Kind regards > Ulf Hansson _______________________________________________ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
