From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2012 21:40:34 +0000 Subject: Re: Device tree binding for DVFS table Message-Id: <20120715214033.GK4041@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> MIME-Version: 1 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="9aCKuHbn5v2q3RVc" List-Id: References: <4FFD77FE.8050206@nvidia.com> <4FFD87BD.2030206@gmail.com> <4FFE4DD0.7020407@nvidia.com> <50006935.2080606@nvidia.com> In-Reply-To: <50006935.2080606@nvidia.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org --9aCKuHbn5v2q3RVc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 12:00:14AM +0530, Prashant Gaikwad wrote: > On Thursday 12 July 2012 09:38 AM, Prashant Gaikwad wrote: > >About repeating frequencies, operating voltage for a frequency > >would be the highest one mapped in the table. This sounds very surprising... that would generally just result in higher power consumption. > >I know this makes reading difficult but it provides flexibility, > Does this explanation help? The loss of comprehensibility seems like a really major disadvantage for very little practical gain here. Big arrays in DT are already hard enough to read without adding extra complexity on top of that. --9aCKuHbn5v2q3RVc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJQAzjKAAoJEBus8iNuMP3dqncP/RmvCwSe+KiN+22X3SQdm3Rf 1MNvK1d78WF/Svu+hBZrWbSt+IyBPkHo+3RV0nMbOS90o2ir6kbopGk3CgJVZyjm rI9cm+kauBt9fU6A+ephmqGJtq0Ilbuy25iR2T9Mq+PXu4JrGRm0M/qUb/x8b1v5 D1w9U55FjiGA+RXpUnnJiP4NI1gMuQu7fRtbQrYaFIlyeW+sS0hTu6ViEkBYRYCD yl7auJBvvQw5pvXyBCfBbUGjL5NVh8k964+Jeq8iRpa9Vjll+W1I3qpBnc2pxrJz kmbCy1jkKWQlM1k4IugK4jNnyGrmuZH6FZcnVtfHQQ9pFnwOc74XJg45EDlwHzAu 0ddjJNkJONoul/W+ipVJTpwVB3P+ywuZeKE4djHnRH+rhvhjACFkdQ5dHk9l3C4K lNsEL2tVGvqU7kBAw6C3gLWlQqH2Y5RKS4t9NMVdz+Gqt1E0lh+kt7SMfjPMhHvQ OX3W36RqPPB/WprcUF6jGiMTCdKeJ/dzNfT9PSLKixcKT2y7evYRxgZ9cL02yI3b mCtz7RbyAGbIAYUjEr2t2bBHAKy3xzMLotV2baiWd961JZgghX81ZgEmk/QcELpL KEthTpqwpikuxHbY3k0s6H8pAI9KUQ9XYxE6VIiTC1gSme5xFtLOYGu/Mb6ij0Jr 22nHz4L1TqN/5lJmrwyu =U9PK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --9aCKuHbn5v2q3RVc-- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com (Mark Brown) Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2012 22:40:34 +0100 Subject: Device tree binding for DVFS table In-Reply-To: <50006935.2080606@nvidia.com> References: <4FFD77FE.8050206@nvidia.com> <4FFD87BD.2030206@gmail.com> <4FFE4DD0.7020407@nvidia.com> <50006935.2080606@nvidia.com> Message-ID: <20120715214033.GK4041@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 12:00:14AM +0530, Prashant Gaikwad wrote: > On Thursday 12 July 2012 09:38 AM, Prashant Gaikwad wrote: > >About repeating frequencies, operating voltage for a frequency > >would be the highest one mapped in the table. This sounds very surprising... that would generally just result in higher power consumption. > >I know this makes reading difficult but it provides flexibility, > Does this explanation help? The loss of comprehensibility seems like a really major disadvantage for very little practical gain here. Big arrays in DT are already hard enough to read without adding extra complexity on top of that. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: