On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 01:35:47PM -0500, Rob Clark wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 1:21 PM, Eric Anholt wrote:
> > Rob Clark writes:
> >
> >> The plan is to use the OPP bindings. For now, remove the documentation
> >> for qcom,gpu-pwrlevels, and make the driver fall back to a safe low
> >> clo
On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 11:49:18AM -0500, Rob Clark wrote:
> The plan is to use the OPP bindings. For now, remove the documentation
> for qcom,gpu-pwrlevels, and make the driver fall back to a safe low
> clock if the node is not present.
>
> Note that no upstream dtb use this node. For now we ke
Rob Clark writes:
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 1:21 PM, Eric Anholt wrote:
>> Rob Clark writes:
>>
>>> The plan is to use the OPP bindings. For now, remove the documentation
>>> for qcom,gpu-pwrlevels, and make the driver fall back to a safe low
>>> clock if the node is not present.
>>>
>>> Note
On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 1:21 PM, Eric Anholt wrote:
> Rob Clark writes:
>
>> The plan is to use the OPP bindings. For now, remove the documentation
>> for qcom,gpu-pwrlevels, and make the driver fall back to a safe low
>> clock if the node is not present.
>>
>> Note that no upstream dtb use this
Rob Clark writes:
> The plan is to use the OPP bindings. For now, remove the documentation
> for qcom,gpu-pwrlevels, and make the driver fall back to a safe low
> clock if the node is not present.
>
> Note that no upstream dtb use this node. For now we keep compatibility
> with this node to avo
The plan is to use the OPP bindings. For now, remove the documentation
for qcom,gpu-pwrlevels, and make the driver fall back to a safe low
clock if the node is not present.
Note that no upstream dtb use this node. For now we keep compatibility
with this node to avoid breaking compatibility with
