From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Timo Sigurdsson" Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: sunxi: Raise minimum CPU voltage for sun7i-a20 to a level all boards can supply Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2015 10:38:19 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <20150804083819.2F3EE6C83EF9@dd34104.kasserver.com> References: <1438543386-7253-1-git-send-email-public_timo.s@silentcreek.de><20150803091300.GY2564@lukather> Reply-To: public_timo.s-fWgRPtSzPNU3WX+qO2AYSQ@public.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20150803091300.GY2564@lukather> List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: , List-Unsubscribe: , To: maxime.ripard-wi1+55ScJUtKEb57/3fJTNBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org Cc: robh+dt-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, pawel.moll-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org, mark.rutland-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org, ijc+devicetree-KcIKpvwj1kUDXYZnReoRVg@public.gmane.org, galak-sgV2jX0FEOL9JmXXK+q4OQ@public.gmane.org, linux-lFZ/pmaqli7XmaaqVzeoHQ@public.gmane.org, devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-sunxi-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org, wens-jdAy2FN1RRM@public.gmane.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org Hi Maxime, Maxime Ripard schrieb am 03.08.2015 11:13: > On Sun, Aug 02, 2015 at 09:23:06PM +0200, Timo Sigurdsson wrote: >> sun7i-a20.dtsi contains an cpufreq operating point at 0.9 volts. Most A20 >> boards >> (or all?), however, do not allow the voltage to go below 1.0V. Thus, raise the >> voltage for the lowest operating point to 1.0V so all boards can actually use >> it. > > This is not a property of a board, but is the actual limit documented > by Allwinner for the A20. Some individual SoCs might have wider > tolerances, but that's not a property of a board, it's really a > property of a single SoC, and we cannot make any assumption on the > board. Thanks for the clarification. That was a misunderstanding on my side. I can update the commit message in a second version of the patch, but the actual code change can be kept as is then, I guess. > (and please make sure to run checkpatch before sending your patches) Sorry about that. Will do when I post a second version of the patch. Thanks, Timo