From: Kevin Hilman <khilman@deeprootsystems.com>
To: Jean Pihet <jpihet@mvista.com>
Cc: Maxime Petazzoni <mpetazzoni@mvista.com>,
"Premi, Sanjeev" <premi@ti.com>,
"linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: VDD1 voltage after resume from idle
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 11:11:26 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <878we13tb5.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200911201955.44354.jpihet@mvista.com> (Jean Pihet's message of "Fri\, 20 Nov 2009 19\:55\:44 +0100")
Jean Pihet <jpihet@mvista.com> writes:
> Hi Kevin,
>
> On Friday 20 November 2009 19:29:02 Kevin Hilman wrote:
>> Maxime Petazzoni <mpetazzoni@mvista.com> writes:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > * Premi, Sanjeev <premi@ti.com> [2009-11-20 21:17:04]:
>> >> I am facing a strange problem on OMAP3EVM after resuming from idle.
>> >> When using OPP5, the VDD1 voltage ramps to 1.35V.
>> >>
>> >> However, when i go thru the idle/wakeup cycle, the voltage never
>> >> ramps back to 1.35V but stays at 1.20V.
>> >
>> > I'm seeing some interesting behavior with the OPP values here, too, with
>> > suspend/resume. I'm using SRF based PM and CPUFREQ. Here's what happens:
>> >
>> > When changing the CPU frequency through the scaling_setfreq knob of
>> > CPUFREQ, the vdd{1,2}_opp values are updated accordingly. After a
>> > suspend/resume cycles, the OPPs return to their pre-suspend values, all
>> > is fine.
>> >
>> > But when changing the OPP values by hand through the vdd{1,2}_opp knobs,
>> > the CPU frequency is changed accordingly, which is expected. But after a
>> > suspend/resume cycle, the OPP values return to the value CPUFREQ set
>> > them to (which may be different than the default OPP values of 3).
>> >
>> > Is this the normal behavior? Is cpufreq authoritative on the OPP values
>> > on resume? Or should it follow whatever value was manually set before
>> > suspending?
>>
>> FWIW, the vdd*_opp sysfs hooks were for initial debug/dev and should
>> be considered experimental (a.k.a broken.) They will disappear from
>> the PM branch shortly.
>>
>> CPUfreq should be the only interface used for DVFS.
> Could the PM page on elinux.org be updated with that info? I am proposing to
> change it before you ask me ;p
Done.
I added the following note to the 'opp control' section.
OPP control via sysfs is deprecated. Please use CPUfreq interfaces for DVFS.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-11-20 19:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-11-20 15:47 VDD1 voltage after resume from idle Premi, Sanjeev
2009-11-20 15:48 ` Menon, Nishanth
2009-11-20 15:54 ` Premi, Sanjeev
2009-11-20 15:59 ` Menon, Nishanth
2009-11-20 16:08 ` Premi, Sanjeev
2009-11-20 16:29 ` Maxime Petazzoni
2009-11-20 18:15 ` Premi, Sanjeev
2009-11-20 19:34 ` Premi, Sanjeev
2009-11-23 13:37 ` Premi, Sanjeev
2009-11-20 18:29 ` Kevin Hilman
2009-11-20 18:31 ` Maxime Petazzoni
2009-11-20 18:55 ` Jean Pihet
2009-11-20 19:11 ` Kevin Hilman [this message]
2009-11-20 19:19 ` Jean Pihet
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=878we13tb5.fsf@deeprootsystems.com \
--to=khilman@deeprootsystems.com \
--cc=jpihet@mvista.com \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mpetazzoni@mvista.com \
--cc=premi@ti.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox