On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 04:00, Premi, Sanjeev <pr...@ti.com> wrote: >> While cleaning up voltdm_c set earlier this week, I think your changes >> apply better there. >> btw, I could incorporate a bit of your code into my patch, esp the one >> Tony commented on http://marc.info/?l=linux-omap&m=130570559515977&w=2 ok this part got rejected pending regulator framework for scalable voltage domains..
>> but, overall, on the topic of SR, either: >> a) move SR autocomp into sysfs (and dump the rest of the debugfs - it >> is useful for validation, but does'nt really provide additional info) >> - given that it used to reside in /sys/power/sr_vddx_autocomp and then >> moved to debugfs, I am not sure if this is the right path >> b) move SR autocomp into a board defined configuration.. more >> intrusive, but folks would really want to enable SR as an option at >> times from userspace - many distros and devices do this (e.g. N900).. > > [sp] I am not sure what you are suggesting. Can't we take in the patch and > then do the movements? ... the ones that doesn't seem to be implemented > so far (based on your comments). depends on what Kevin thinks is the future of voltdm(in terms of which .4x target) - might be good to focus our attention into a single branch and cleanit up for upstream.. I am personally not sure what should autocomp's future should be - I think option of having boards be able to define it - maybe as part of regulator framework + debugfs cleanup similar(as voltdm_c has removed I believe all of voltage debugfs - so your patch can be much smaller and effective there).. Regards, Nishanth Menon -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
