From: Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>
To: Andrew Murray <amurray@mpc-data.co.uk>
Cc: "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: PM: VDD2 OPPs
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 14:41:28 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B5F5378.9020800@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0C997DD87CC88A4F86C897F52650B52B02807701@MOLSON.mpc-data.co.uk>
Andrew Murray had written, on 01/26/2010 02:34 PM, the following:
> Hello,
>
> With regards to the OMAP2 (or at least the 3530 EVM) -the TRM and
> various whitepapers suggest that they are 3 OPP levels available for
> VDD2 (L3). However, from looking at the sources (linux-omap-pm / pm
> branch) it seems that only 2 OPP levels are supported (@166Mhz and
> @83Mhz) and used. I also notice that these rates are different to those
> in a whitepaper (166, 100 and 41.5). Is there any particular reason why
on OMAP34/35xx, I believe it should be s/100/83/.
> only 2 OPPs are used?
to my knowledge 41.5Mhz is not known to provide any performance
benefits. you can also see [1] and add 41.5 (pm-wip-opp is the new
branch where we are introducing opp layer.
>
> I understand that the OPP level of VDD2 may be set by changes to the OPP
> level of VDD1 (i.e. resource34xx.c:set_opp) - and modifying VDD1's OPP
> via cpufreq seems to be the only way to adjust the VDD2 OPP from
> user-land - is this correct?
The old /sys/power/vdd2_[opp|lock] was deprecated out. currently the
control is for vdd1 OPP using cpufreq and indirect dependency for VDD2,
is there a need for direct control of VDD2 freq?
--
Regards,
Nishanth Menon
Ref:
[1]
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/khilman/linux-omap-pm.git;a=blob;f=arch/arm/mach-omap2/cpufreq34xx.c;h=07873e87ffc0fef97b4554efc3f17dc696cb25e3;hb=4f54a09e0ed9b2ee8e1adfe1716297792310d1c6#l46
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-01-26 20:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-01-26 20:34 PM: VDD2 OPPs Andrew Murray
2010-01-26 20:41 ` Nishanth Menon [this message]
2010-01-26 21:46 ` Andrew Murray
2010-01-26 22:02 ` Cousson, Benoit
2010-01-26 23:06 ` Andrew Murray
2010-01-26 22:40 ` Kevin Hilman
2010-01-26 23:22 ` Andrew Murray
2010-01-26 23:47 ` Kevin Hilman
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4B5F5378.9020800@ti.com \
--to=nm@ti.com \
--cc=amurray@mpc-data.co.uk \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.