On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 10:02:39AM +0530, Rajendra Nayak wrote: > > On 17/04/17 06:27, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> >>> If we are looking this power-domains with performance as just some > >>> *advanced regulators*, I don't like the complexity added. > + Mark > I don;t see any public discussions on why we ruled out using regulators to > support this but maybe there were some offline discussions on this. > Mark, this is a long thread, so just summarizing here to give you the context. > At qualcomm, we have an external M3 core (running its own firmware) which > controls > a few voltage rails (including AVS on those). The devices vote for the > voltage levels > (or performance levels) they need by passing an integer value to the M3 (not > actual > voltage values). Since that didn't fit well with the existing regulator apis > it was As I'm getting fed up of saying: if the values you are setting are not voltages and do not behave like voltages then the hardware should not be represented as a voltage regulator since if they are represented as voltage regulators things will expect to be able to control them as voltage regulators. This hardware is quite clearly providing OPPs directly, I would expect this to be handled in the OPP code somehow.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
