Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 00/30] Introduce core voltage scaling for NVIDIA
 Tegra20/30 SoCs
From:   Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com>
To:     Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc:     Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>,
        Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
        Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>,
        Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>,
        Peter Chen <Peter.Chen@nxp.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
        Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>,
        =?UTF-8?Q?Uwe_Kleine-K=c3=b6nig?= <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>,
        Peter Geis <pgwipeout@gmail.com>,
        Nicolas Chauvet <kwizart@gmail.com>,
        linux-samsung-soc <linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org>,
        driverdevel <devel@driverdev.osuosl.org>,
        Linux USB List <linux-usb@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org,
        "linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org" <linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        DTML <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
        Linux Media Mailing List <linux-media@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-tegra <linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20201104234427.26477-1-digetx@gmail.com>
 <CAPDyKFr7qTU2RPhA_ZrbCayoTTNUEno1zdmvmv+8HBe-Owrfeg@mail.gmail.com>
 <cd147ab0-1304-a491-7a56-ee6199c02d32@gmail.com>
 <2716c195-083a-112f-f1e5-2f6b7152a4b5@gmail.com>
 <20201109044354.ljd5pomhob6b7u5v@vireshk-i7>
 <713b319e-bb7b-4743-59f0-b9892c3da92d@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <aba1fcac-74b8-f370-ab45-312975da66e6@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 9 Nov 2020 08:10:16 +0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <713b319e-bb7b-4743-59f0-b9892c3da92d@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

09.11.2020 07:47, Dmitry Osipenko пишет:
> 09.11.2020 07:43, Viresh Kumar пишет:
>> On 08-11-20, 15:19, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>>> I took a detailed look at the GENPD and tried to implement it. Here is
>>> what was found:
>>>
>>> 1. GENPD framework doesn't aggregate performance requests from the
>>> attached devices. This means that if deviceA requests performance state
>>> 10 and then deviceB requests state 3, then framework will set domain's
>>> state to 3 instead of 10.
>>
>> It does. Look at _genpd_reeval_performance_state().
>>
> 
> Thanks, I probably had a bug in the quick prototype and then overlooked
> that function.
> 

If a non-hardware device-tree node is okay to have for the domain, then
I can try again.

What I also haven't mentioned is that GENPD adds some extra complexity
to some drivers (3d, video decoder) because we will need to handle both
new GENPD and legacy Tegra specific pre-genpd era domains.

I'm also not exactly sure how the topology of domains should look like
because Tegra has a power-controller (PMC) which manages power rail of a
few hardware units. Perhaps it should be

  device -> PMC domain -> CORE domain

but not exactly sure for now.