On Sun, Apr 19, 2020 at 11:25:08AM +0200, Clément Péron wrote:
> Just saw that a Lima devfreq[0] has been also introduced with I think
> exactly the same logic.
> Is this something that hasn't been triggered by Maintainer or I am
> missing something?
My understanding is that there is very
Hi,
On Fri, 17 Apr 2020 at 14:33, Clément Péron wrote:
>
> Hi Robin,
>
> On Fri, 17 Apr 2020 at 13:10, Robin Murphy wrote:
> >
> > On 2020-04-16 2:42 pm, Steven Price wrote:
> > [...]
> > > Perhaps a better approach would be for Panfrost to hand over the struct
> > > regulator objects it has
Hi Robin,
On Fri, 17 Apr 2020 at 13:10, Robin Murphy wrote:
>
> On 2020-04-16 2:42 pm, Steven Price wrote:
> [...]
> > Perhaps a better approach would be for Panfrost to hand over the struct
> > regulator objects it has already got to the OPP framework. I.e. open
> > code
On 2020-04-16 2:42 pm, Steven Price wrote:
[...]
Perhaps a better approach would be for Panfrost to hand over the struct
regulator objects it has already got to the OPP framework. I.e. open
code dev_pm_opp_set_regulators(), but instead of calling
regulator_get_optional() simply populate the
On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 02:42:13PM +0100, Steven Price wrote:
> On 14/04/2020 20:16, Clément Péron wrote:
> > That's can be reworked and Panfrost can only probe regulator if there
> > is no opp-table.
> This is what I was thinking about looking at. But it may make sense instead
> to extend the
On 14/04/2020 20:16, Clément Péron wrote:
Hi Mark,
On Tue, 14 Apr 2020 at 20:55, Mark Brown wrote:
On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 08:20:23PM +0200, Clément Péron wrote:
Hi Liam and Mark,
You might want to flag stuff like this in the subject line, I very
nearly deleted this without opening it
