lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [May]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] ARM: dts: imx6sx-sdb: Remove cpufreq OPP override
From
Date
On 05/03/2017 07:58 PM, Leonard Crestez wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-05-03 at 17:59 +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> On 05/03/2017 04:58 PM, Leonard Crestez wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2017-05-03 at 16:26 +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>>> 2) It actually fixes a problem with the voltage rails such that the DVFS
>>>> works without leaving the system in unstable or dead state. You do
>>>> need the second part of my patch if you drop the OPP hackery, without
>>>> it the power framework cannot correctly configure the core voltages,
>>>> so the patch from Leonard makes things worse.
>>> No, I think there is a misunderstanding here. The second part of your
>>> patch will cause cpufreq poking at LDOs to indirectly adjust the input
>>> from the PMIC to the minimum required (this is LDO target +
>>> min_dropout_uv). Without it by default VDD_ARM_SOC_IN will remain fixed
>>> as 1375mV from boot.
>
>> Who sets / guarantees that default value for ARM and SOC rails ?
>
> I think it's from the PMIC hardware itself (but maybe uboot plays with
> it). VDD_ARM_SOC_IN on this board is tied to SW1AB from MMPF0200:
>
> http://www.nxp.com/assets/documents/data/en/data-sheets/MMPF0200.pdf
>
> It seems reasonable to rely on such voltages set externally.

Isn't it an established rule that Linux should not depend on bootloader
settings ? Or did that change ?

>> With the OPP override in place, there's at least the guarantee that both
>> rails will have the same voltage requirement. If you remove the OPP
>> override without modeling the actual regulator wiring, the guarantee is
>> gone.
>
> The imx6sx chip has internal LDO_ARM and LDO_SOC regulators which can
> generate separate voltages for arm/soc. The fact that these regulators
> share the same supply is only an issue when they are set in bypass
> mode.
>
> However the boot issues happen on REV C but apparently not REV B of the
> board. I don't have a good explanation for this so maybe I am missing
> something.

Well the regulator(s) cannot be correctly configured if the kernel
doesn't have the correct power distribution described in the DT .

--
Best regards,
Marek Vasut

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-05-03 21:48    [W:0.056 / U:2.144 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site