From: Dragan Simic <dsimic@manjaro.org>
To: "Heiko Stübner" <heiko@sntech.de>
Cc: linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
robh@kernel.org, krzk+dt@kernel.org, conor+dt@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Diederik de Haas <didi.debian@cknow.org>,
Jonas Karlman <jonas@kwiboo.se>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: rockchip: Add optional GPU OPP voltage ranges to RK356x SoC dtsi
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2024 17:39:34 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <36170f8485293b336106e92346478daa@manjaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f10d5a3c425c2c4312512c20bd35073c@manjaro.org>
On 2024-06-29 17:25, Dragan Simic wrote:
> On 2024-06-29 17:10, Heiko Stübner wrote:
>> Am Samstag, 29. Juni 2024, 07:11:24 CEST schrieb Dragan Simic:
>>
>>> +#ifndef RK356X_GPU_NPU_SHARED_REGULATOR
>>
>> is there some reason for this duplicating of opps?
>>
>> The regulator framework should pick the lowest supported voltage
>> anyway, so it seems you're just extending them upwards a bit.
>>
>> So I really don't so why we'd need to sets here.
>
> The reason is improved strictness. Having the exact GPU OPP voltages
> required for the boards whose GPU regulators can provide those exact
> voltages makes it possible to detect misconfigurations much easier,
> just like it was the case with the board dts misconfiguration that
> resulted in the recent DCDC_REG2 patch. [1]
>
> If we had GPU OPP voltage ranges in place instead, the aforementioned
> issue would probably remain undetected for some time. It wouldn't be
> the end of the world, :) of course, but the resulting increased power
> consumption isn't one of the desired outcomes.
>
> [1]
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-rockchip/e70742ea2df432bf57b3f7de542d81ca22b0da2f.1716225483.git.dsimic@manjaro.org/
On second thought, after seeing that the RK3399 CPU and GPU OPPs
already specify voltage ranges, I think it would be better to drop
the distinction between the separate strict voltages and the voltage
ranges in this patch, and to add some additional debugging messages
to drivers/opp/of.c that would allow any misconfiguration issues to
be rather easily detected.
>> Also the voltage-range thing makes sense for non-gpu-npu-sharing
>> boards, when the supplying regulator does not fully support the
>> direct single-value voltage.
>>
>> (rk3399-puma was such a case if I remember correctly)
>>
>> So I really see no reason for this duplication.
>
> Perhaps we could rename the RK356X_GPU_NPU_SHARED_REGULATOR macro
> accordingly in the v2, to RK356X_GPU_OPP_VOLTAGE_RANGES, for example,
> with some additional explanations in the patch description and the
> RK356x SoC dtsi file itself.
>
>>> opp-200000000 {
>>> opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <200000000>;
>>> opp-microvolt = <825000>;
>>> @@ -222,6 +229,37 @@ opp-800000000 {
>>> opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <800000000>;
>>> opp-microvolt = <1000000>;
>>> };
>>> +#else
>>> + opp-200000000 {
>>> + opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <200000000>;
>>> + opp-microvolt = <825000 825000 1000000>;
>>> + };
>>> +
>>> + opp-300000000 {
>>> + opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <300000000>;
>>> + opp-microvolt = <825000 825000 1000000>;
>>> + };
>>> +
>>> + opp-400000000 {
>>> + opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <400000000>;
>>> + opp-microvolt = <825000 825000 1000000>;
>>> + };
>>> +
>>> + opp-600000000 {
>>> + opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <600000000>;
>>> + opp-microvolt = <825000 825000 1000000>;
>>> + };
>>> +
>>> + opp-700000000 {
>>> + opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <700000000>;
>>> + opp-microvolt = <900000 900000 1000000>;
>>> + };
>>> +
>>> + opp-800000000 {
>>> + opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <800000000>;
>>> + opp-microvolt = <1000000 1000000 1000000>;
>>> + };
>>> +#endif /* RK356X_GPU_NPU_SHARED_REGULATOR */
>>> };
>>>
>>> hdmi_sound: hdmi-sound {
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Linux-rockchip mailing list
>> Linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org
>> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-rockchip mailing list
> Linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip
_______________________________________________
Linux-rockchip mailing list
Linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-29 15:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-29 5:11 [PATCH] arm64: dts: rockchip: Add optional GPU OPP voltage ranges to RK356x SoC dtsi Dragan Simic
2024-06-29 15:10 ` Heiko Stübner
2024-06-29 15:25 ` Dragan Simic
2024-06-29 15:39 ` Dragan Simic [this message]
2024-06-29 16:18 ` Heiko Stübner
2024-06-29 16:22 ` Dragan Simic
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=36170f8485293b336106e92346478daa@manjaro.org \
--to=dsimic@manjaro.org \
--cc=conor+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=didi.debian@cknow.org \
--cc=heiko@sntech.de \
--cc=jonas@kwiboo.se \
--cc=krzk+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=robh@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox