On 30-07-20, 10:01, Stephan Gerhold wrote:
> dev_pm_opp_attach_genpd() allows attaching an arbitrary number of
> power domains to an OPP table. In that case, the genpd core will
> create a virtual device for each of the power domains.
>
> At the moment, the OPP core only calls
> dev_pm_genpd_set_performance_state() on these virtual devices.
> It does not attempt to power on the power domains. Therefore
> the required power domain might never get turned on.
>
> So far, dev_pm_opp_attach_genpd() is only used in qcom-cpufreq-nvmem.c
> to attach the CPR power domain to the CPU OPP table. The CPR driver
> does not check if it was actually powered on so this did not cause
> any problems. However, other drivers (e.g. rpmpd) might ignore the
> performance state until the power domain is actually powered on.
>
> Since these virtual devices are managed exclusively by the OPP core,
> I would say that it should also be responsible to ensure they are
> enabled. A similar approach is already used for regulators, see
> commit 8d45719caaf5 ("opp: core: add regulators enable and disable").
>
> This commit implements similar functionality for the virtual genpd
> devices managed by the OPP core. The power domains are turned on
> the first time dev_pm_opp_set_rate() is called. They are turned off
> again when dev_pm_opp_set_rate(dev, 0) is called.
>
> Signed-off-by: Stephan Gerhold <step...@gerhold.net>
> ---
> Related discussion:
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20200426123140.ga190...@gerhold.net/
>
> There would be also other ways to implement this, e.g. device links,
> assuming that the device using the OPP table also makes use of runtime PM.
> My first thought was that it would be most consistent to handle this like
> regulators, bandwidth votes etc. RFC :)
This stuff was done ages back and I am starting to forget almost
everything now :)
Ulf, why doesn't pm_runtime_get(dev) take care of enabling multiple
power domain case ? RFP (request for patience) :)
--
viresh
