From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from phobos.denx.de (phobos.denx.de [85.214.62.61]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8AB7DC00140 for ; Mon, 8 Aug 2022 20:05:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from h2850616.stratoserver.net (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by phobos.denx.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6406F84109; Mon, 8 Aug 2022 22:05:52 +0200 (CEST) Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=tinet.cat Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=u-boot-bounces@lists.denx.de Received: by phobos.denx.de (Postfix, from userid 109) id 119878410C; Mon, 8 Aug 2022 22:05:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mx1.tinet.cat (mx1.dipta.cat [195.76.233.59]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by phobos.denx.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7799383FB2 for ; Mon, 8 Aug 2022 22:05:48 +0200 (CEST) Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=tinet.cat Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=xdrudis@tinet.cat X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1659989146-12aaf205f8428920001-4l7tJC Received: from smtp01.tinet.cat (smtp.tinet.cat [195.77.216.131]) by mx1.tinet.cat with ESMTP id U7oaLeLQcWlqyXFH; Mon, 08 Aug 2022 22:05:46 +0200 (CEST) X-Barracuda-Envelope-From: xdrudis@tinet.cat X-Barracuda-Effective-Source-IP: smtp.tinet.cat[195.77.216.131] X-Barracuda-Apparent-Source-IP: 195.77.216.131 Received: from begut (99.red-79-152-185.dynamicip.rima-tde.net [79.152.185.99]) by smtp01.tinet.cat (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D224B605E0C1; Mon, 8 Aug 2022 22:05:46 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2022 22:05:45 +0200 From: Xavier Drudis Ferran To: Jagan Teki Cc: Michal =?utf-8?B?U3VjaMOhbmVr?= , Xavier Drudis Ferran , u-boot@lists.denx.de, Kever Yang , cym@rock-chips.com Subject: Re: [SPAM] rk3399 TPL memory setup code triggers clock frequency limit assertion Message-ID: X-ASG-Orig-Subj: Re: [SPAM] rk3399 TPL memory setup code triggers clock frequency limit assertion References: <20220807144404.GJ17705@kitsune.suse.cz> <20220808161638.GL17705@kitsune.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Barracuda-Connect: smtp.tinet.cat[195.77.216.131] X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1659989146 X-Barracuda-URL: https://webmail.tinet.cat:443/cgi-mod/mark.cgi X-Barracuda-Scan-Msg-Size: 1609 X-Barracuda-BRTS-Status: 1 X-Barracuda-Bayes: SPAM GLOBAL 0.9539 1.0000 3.8159 X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: 3.82 X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=3.82 using global scores of TAG_LEVEL=1000.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=6.0 KILL_LEVEL=8.0 tests= X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.2, rules version 3.2.3.99943 Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- X-BeenThere: u-boot@lists.denx.de X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39 Precedence: list List-Id: U-Boot discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: u-boot-bounces@lists.denx.de Sender: "U-Boot" X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.103.6 at phobos.denx.de X-Virus-Status: Clean El Mon, Aug 08, 2022 at 11:22:49PM +0530, Jagan Teki deia: > > If I remember correctly when I work with YouMin on LPDDR4 the initial > code to start to check with was 50MHz (It was not working at that time > with 48MHz). Not sure what to make other changes to fix that to try on > 48MHz. > Not sure I understand. Do you mean when you and YouMin worked in this (thanks for your work) you had mesured that the code gave 50MHz ? Maybe. It seems out of spec, so it doesn't have to give 48MHz, I guess it can give whatever. 48MHz is the concluion of a theory for which we haven't satisfied the hypothesis. Or do you mean the code for this clock was different when you worked initially, and that code gave 50MHz theoretically ? I haven't looked at the git log. > Better resend the patch again and add YouMin and others to see for comments. > I don't have much time right now to pull, see if it applies still and test again. Michal just tried, not sure how clean it might have been for him, or what base he used, so anyone feel free to resend if you think it's useful or know better who to put in cc. Who would "others" be ? If I got my Cc: wrong the first time I fear I'll fail again. Michal just sent a tested-by to my orignal patch[1]. Should a resend fare better ? Or how many resends? I may resend this one line patch when I have time if nobody has resent yet or merged the original. YouMin helped me confirm and said something unconclusive in private, not opposing to change it. [1] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/patch/20220716103144.GA2167@begut/