On 4/10/25 9:10 AM, Stephan Gerhold wrote: > On Wed, Apr 09, 2025 at 08:35:29PM +0200, Konrad Dybcio wrote: >> On 4/7/25 6:27 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote: >>> On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 at 22:41, Konrad Dybcio >>> <konrad.dybcio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 4/4/25 4:59 AM, Rob Herring (Arm) wrote: >>>>> "rpmhpd" is not documented nor used anywhere. As the enable-method is >>>>> "psci" use "psci" for the power-domain name. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Rob Herring (Arm) <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> --- >>>> >>>> "psci" is what we want here, but these platforms require some more >>>> massaging.. >>> >>> So this isn't for CPU performance scaling? >> >> Nope! >> > > Huh, this is definitely "perf" (= cpufreq) and not "psci" (= cpuidle). > If you run blame on this line you get to: > > commit 0ec7bde7b590f8efa5823df3b52b32dd373060ff > Author: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@xxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Thu Apr 8 22:34:45 2021 +0530 > > ARM: dts: qcom: sdx55: Add CPUFreq support > > Add CPUFreq support to SDX55 platform using the cpufreq-dt driver. > There is no dedicated hardware block available on this platform to > carry on the CPUFreq duties. Hence, it is accomplished using the CPU > clock and regulators tied together by the operating points table. > > https://web.git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=0ec7bde7b590f8efa5823df3b52b32dd373060ff > > The OPP table looks like it's supposed to set SDX55_CX performance > states according to the chosen CPU frequency. MSM8909 has a similar > setup where the CPU is supplied directly by VDDCX and we describe that > with "perf" too [1]. Ohh right I was under the impression that qcom,cpufreq-hw is used on those too, but apparently not.. Konrad
