On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 11:58:08AM -0700, Saravana Kannan wrote: > On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 10:25 AM Sibi Sankar <si...@codeaurora.org> wrote: > > > > Hey Saravana, > > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10850815/ > > There was already a discussion ^^ on how bandwidth bindings were to be > > named. > > Yes, I'm aware of that series. That series is trying to define a BW > mapping for an existing frequency OPP table. This patch is NOT about > adding a mapping to an existing table. This patch is about adding the > notion of BW OPP tables where BW is the "key" instead of "frequency". > > So let's not mixed up these two series.
Maybe different reasons, but in the end we'd end up with 2 bandwidth properties. We need to sort out how they'd overlap/coexist. The same comment in that series about defining a standard unit suffix also applies to this one. Rob
