mbox series

[0/2] soc: qcom: rpmhpd: Improve rpmhpd enable handling

Message ID 20210703005416.2668319-1-bjorn.andersson@linaro.org
Headers show
Series soc: qcom: rpmhpd: Improve rpmhpd enable handling | expand

Message

Bjorn Andersson July 3, 2021, 12:54 a.m. UTC 
During the discussion and investigation of [1] it became apparent that
enabling a rpmhpd, without requesting a performance state is a nop. This
results in a situation where drivers that normally would just describe
their dependency on the power-domain and have the core implicitly enable
that power domain also needs to make an explicit vote for a performance
state - e.g. by a lone required-opp.

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20210630133149.3204290-4-dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org/

Bjorn Andersson (2):
  soc: qcom: rpmhpd: Use corner in power_off
  soc: qcom: rpmhpd: Make power_on actually enable the domain

 drivers/soc/qcom/rpmhpd.c | 19 ++++++++++++-------
 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

-- 
2.29.2

Comments

Ulf Hansson July 5, 2021, 12:55 p.m. UTC | #1 
On Sat, 3 Jul 2021 at 02:55, Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org> wrote:
>

> During the discussion and investigation of [1] it became apparent that

> enabling a rpmhpd, without requesting a performance state is a nop. This

> results in a situation where drivers that normally would just describe

> their dependency on the power-domain and have the core implicitly enable

> that power domain also needs to make an explicit vote for a performance

> state - e.g. by a lone required-opp.

>

> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20210630133149.3204290-4-dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org/

>

> Bjorn Andersson (2):

>   soc: qcom: rpmhpd: Use corner in power_off

>   soc: qcom: rpmhpd: Make power_on actually enable the domain

>

>  drivers/soc/qcom/rpmhpd.c | 19 ++++++++++++-------

>  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

>


FWIW:

Reviewed-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>


Kind regards
Uffe