Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] CPUFreq: Add support for cpu performance dependencies

2020-11-05 Thread Ionela Voinescu
Hi guys, On Thursday 05 Nov 2020 at 15:25:53 (+0100), Vincent Guittot wrote: [..] > > > - Because of hardware co-ordination of otherwise co-ordinated CPUs, > > > few things break. Thermal and EAS are some of the examples and so > > > you are trying to fix them here by proving them the missing

Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] CPUFreq: Add support for cpu performance dependencies

2020-11-05 Thread Vincent Guittot
On Wed, 4 Nov 2020 at 19:02, Nicola Mazzucato wrote: > > Hi Viresh, thanks for looking into this. > > On 11/3/20 10:18 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > On 02-11-20, 12:01, Nicola Mazzucato wrote: > >> Hi All, > >> > >> In this V3 posting I have replaced the new dt-binding with minor changes/ > >> impro

Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] CPUFreq: Add support for cpu performance dependencies

2020-11-04 Thread Nicola Mazzucato
Hi Viresh, thanks for looking into this. On 11/3/20 10:18 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 02-11-20, 12:01, Nicola Mazzucato wrote: >> Hi All, >> >> In this V3 posting I have replaced the new dt-binding with minor changes/ >> improvements for opp (since we are now using opp tables instead). >> The RFC

Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] CPUFreq: Add support for cpu performance dependencies

2020-11-03 Thread Viresh Kumar
On 02-11-20, 12:01, Nicola Mazzucato wrote: > Hi All, > > In this V3 posting I have replaced the new dt-binding with minor changes/ > improvements for opp (since we are now using opp tables instead). > The RFC still stands on how to make this info available to sw consumers. > > In the RFC, I am p