On 03/02/2017 04:43 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:27 AM, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 02/28/2017 09:22 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 9:14 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
[...]
>>
On 03/02/2017 04:43 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:27 AM, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 02/28/2017 09:22 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 9:14 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
[...]
>> ---> Parent domain-2
On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:27 AM, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
>
>
> On 02/28/2017 09:22 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 9:14 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>
> ---> Parent domain-2 (Contains
On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:27 AM, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
>
>
> On 02/28/2017 09:22 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 9:14 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>
> ---> Parent domain-2 (Contains
> Perfomance states)
>
On 01-03-17, 09:45, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 7:14 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > On 28-02-17, 09:52, Rob Herring wrote:
> >> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 9:14 AM, Ulf Hansson
> >> wrote:
> >> > This comes from the early design
On 01-03-17, 09:45, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 7:14 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > On 28-02-17, 09:52, Rob Herring wrote:
> >> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 9:14 AM, Ulf Hansson
> >> wrote:
> >> > This comes from the early design of the generic PM domain, thus I
> >> > assume we
On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 7:14 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 28-02-17, 09:52, Rob Herring wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 9:14 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>> > This comes from the early design of the generic PM domain, thus I
>> > assume we have some HW
On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 7:14 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 28-02-17, 09:52, Rob Herring wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 9:14 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>> > This comes from the early design of the generic PM domain, thus I
>> > assume we have some HW with such complex PM topology. However, I don't
On 02/28/2017 09:22 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 9:14 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>> [...]
>>
---> Parent domain-2 (Contains
Perfomance states)
|
On 02/28/2017 09:22 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 9:14 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>> [...]
>>
---> Parent domain-2 (Contains
Perfomance states)
|
|
On 28-02-17, 08:10, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 12:57 AM, Viresh Kumar
> wrote:
> > That's what I did in V2, but then I turned it down considering the
> > parent/child
> > relationships we may have.
> >
> > There are multiple cases we can have:
> >
> >
On 28-02-17, 08:10, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 12:57 AM, Viresh Kumar
> wrote:
> > That's what I did in V2, but then I turned it down considering the
> > parent/child
> > relationships we may have.
> >
> > There are multiple cases we can have:
> >
> > A.) DeviceX --->
On 28-02-17, 09:52, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 9:14 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> > This comes from the early design of the generic PM domain, thus I
> > assume we have some HW with such complex PM topology. However, I don't
> > know if it is actually being
On 28-02-17, 09:52, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 9:14 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> > This comes from the early design of the generic PM domain, thus I
> > assume we have some HW with such complex PM topology. However, I don't
> > know if it is actually being used.
> >
> > Moreover,
Hi Rob,
On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 4:52 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 9:14 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>> [...]
>>
---> Parent domain-2 (Contains
Perfomance states)
Hi Rob,
On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 4:52 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 9:14 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>> [...]
>>
---> Parent domain-2 (Contains
Perfomance states)
|
On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 9:14 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> [...]
>
>>> ---> Parent domain-2 (Contains
>>> Perfomance states)
>>> |
>>> |
>>> C.) DeviceX --->
On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 9:14 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> [...]
>
>>> ---> Parent domain-2 (Contains
>>> Perfomance states)
>>> |
>>> |
>>> C.) DeviceX ---> Parent-domain-1 |
>>>
[...]
>> ---> Parent domain-2 (Contains
>> Perfomance states)
>> |
>> |
>> C.) DeviceX ---> Parent-domain-1 |
>> |
>>
[...]
>> ---> Parent domain-2 (Contains
>> Perfomance states)
>> |
>> |
>> C.) DeviceX ---> Parent-domain-1 |
>> |
>>
On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 12:57 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 27-02-17, 18:39, Rob Herring wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 02:36:34PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> > If the consumers don't need the capability of switching to different
>> > domain performance states at
On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 12:57 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 27-02-17, 18:39, Rob Herring wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 02:36:34PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> > If the consumers don't need the capability of switching to different
>> > domain performance states at runtime, then they can simply
On 27-02-17, 18:39, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 02:36:34PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > If the consumers don't need the capability of switching to different
> > domain performance states at runtime, then they can simply define their
> > required domain performance state in their
On 27-02-17, 18:39, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 02:36:34PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > If the consumers don't need the capability of switching to different
> > domain performance states at runtime, then they can simply define their
> > required domain performance state in their
On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 02:36:34PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> If the consumers don't need the capability of switching to different
> domain performance states at runtime, then they can simply define their
> required domain performance state in their nodes directly.
>
> But if the device needs
On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 02:36:34PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> If the consumers don't need the capability of switching to different
> domain performance states at runtime, then they can simply define their
> required domain performance state in their nodes directly.
>
> But if the device needs
If the consumers don't need the capability of switching to different
domain performance states at runtime, then they can simply define their
required domain performance state in their nodes directly.
But if the device needs the capability of switching to different domain
performance states, as
If the consumers don't need the capability of switching to different
domain performance states at runtime, then they can simply define their
required domain performance state in their nodes directly.
But if the device needs the capability of switching to different domain
performance states, as
28 matches
Mail list logo