[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <56C20A12.8080305@ti.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2016 11:25:38 -0600
From: Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>
To: Keerthy <a0393675@...com>, Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
CC: Eduardo Valentin <edubezval@...il.com>, Keerthy <j-keerthy@...com>,
Dmitry Lifshitz <lifshitz@...pulab.co.il>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
dt list <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-omap <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
"ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk" <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm: dts: AM57XX: Correct the thermal thresholds
On 02/15/2016 10:13 AM, Keerthy wrote:
[...]
>>
>> This data is in the AM572x datasheet:
>> http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/am5728.pdf
>>
>> Table 5-3 in the current version contains the maximum junction
>> temperatures.
>>
>> this indicates that there are "Commercial" and "extended" -> we may
>> need to introduce just 2 dtsis -> am57xx-commercial and
>> am57xx-extended and reuse those based on the part on the board. just a
>> suggestion..
>
> Or use the minimum of the 2 to be on the safer side if we have to deal
> with one dtsi?
Why would we want to throttle earlier on customer platforms or other
boards using extended? at the very least -> if all upstream boards
have only commercial grade, then just introduce
am57xx-commercial-thermal.dtsi ..
--
Regards,
Nishanth Menon
Powered by blists - more mailing lists