Re: Power Management Framework architectural design

["Juha Keski-Saari" <juha.keski-saari%teleca.com@localhost>]

Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 07:02:00AM +0000, Juha Keski-Saari wrote:
> > Thank you for the clarification, with that information I can refine
> > my suggestion. Since the power and clock domains concept is not a
> > global one, probably we cannot impose change upon the PMF on its
> > account.i
> 
> Well, I would have initially suggested to do this (partly) in the bus
> device layer, but it would also be possible to introduce a new super
> layer below that. The question is what is responsible for providing
> values, e.g. whether to inherit them from the parent device (nice for
> MD hooks).
> 
> Joerg


I believe it is necessary to have fully descriptive definitions for
each particular clock since they mainly just inherit frequency from
their parent and other properties are unique. I think the difference in
mindset here is that of an integral system peripheral and an auxiliary
device connected to a bus host, the OMAP2 needs power management
control in the integrated system peripheral level while auxiliary
devices are not a main concern at the development platform level. Later
yes, when the hardware becomes more diverse, but at the core we have
highly individual devices that do not share a majority of their
properties with any other device.

Juha K-S