linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] cpufreq: tegra20: Use PLL

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 25 May 2018 09:32:25 +0300
From:   Peter De Schrijver <pdeschrijver@...dia.com>
To:     Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>
CC:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
        Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
        Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
        <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] cpufreq: tegra20: Use PLL_C as intermediate clock
 source

On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 03:49:22PM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> On 24.05.2018 13:04, Peter De Schrijver wrote:
> > On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 07:00:20PM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> >> PLL_C is running at 600MHz which is significantly higher than the 216MHz
> >> of the PLL_P and it is known that PLL_C is always-ON because AHB BUS is
> >> running on that PLL. Let's use PLL_C as intermediate clock source, making
> >> CPU snappier a tad during of the frequency transition.
> >>
> > 
> > pll_c isn't necessarily 600Mhz when used as a source for the second display
> > head.
> 
> Hmm, indeed.
> 
> Even if PLL_C rate will be adjusted, it will be higher than the PLL_P.. won't
> it? That's likely to be good enough.
> 

Yes. I think it can be always higher than pll_p, but that assumes the display
driver will always program the highest possible rate for pll_c for a given mode
and then program the display divider to divide it down to the required rate.

> Do you know if any of the available CCLK parents has a glitch-less rate
> switching? I.e. CPU won't hang on the rate switch.
> 

Tegra20 doesn't have dynamic ramp PLLs no. So you always have to switch to a
backup clock source before changing the rate of pll_x.

> There is other possible 600MHz source, the PLL_M. Can we use it? This one also
> may become dynamic if we'll consider implementing the memory scaling, but the
> memory frequency probably will fit the transition role pretty well.

I think this should work, but as you mention it may very well be lower than
pll_p if Tegra20 EMC scaling is re-introduced. I think that's why historically
this was never done. 

Peter.