Re: [PATCH V2 0/2] PM / Domains / OPP: Introduce domain-performance-state binding

2017-01-03 Thread Viresh Kumar
On 22-12-16, 12:14, Rob Herring wrote: > On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 04:26:17PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > Hello, > > > > Some platforms have the capability to configure the performance state of > > their Power Domains. The performance levels are represented by positive > > integer values, a lower

Re: [PATCH V2 0/2] PM / Domains / OPP: Introduce domain-performance-state binding

2017-01-02 Thread Viresh Kumar
On 22-12-16, 12:14, Rob Herring wrote: > On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 04:26:17PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > Hello, > > > > Some platforms have the capability to configure the performance state of > > their Power Domains. The performance levels are represented by positive > > integer values, a lower

Re: [PATCH V2 0/2] PM / Domains / OPP: Introduce domain-performance-state binding

2016-12-22 Thread Rob Herring
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 04:26:17PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > Hello, > > Some platforms have the capability to configure the performance state of > their Power Domains. The performance levels are represented by positive > integer values, a lower value represents lower performance state. > > We

[PATCH V2 0/2] PM / Domains / OPP: Introduce domain-performance-state binding

2016-12-12 Thread Viresh Kumar
Hello, Some platforms have the capability to configure the performance state of their Power Domains. The performance levels are represented by positive integer values, a lower value represents lower performance state. We had some discussions about it in the past on the PM list [1], which is follo