linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: dts: sun8i: add opp-v2 table for A33

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 19 Dec 2016 16:53:23 +0800
From:   Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>
To:     Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>
Cc:     Icenowy Zheng <icenowy@...c.xyz>, Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>,
        Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
        Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz@...e-electrons.com>,
        devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-clk <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-sunxi <linux-sunxi@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: dts: sun8i: add opp-v2 table for A33

On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 4:46 PM, Maxime Ripard
<maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 02:27:54AM +0800, Icenowy Zheng wrote:
>> An operating point table is needed for the cpu frequency adjusting to
>> work.
>>
>> The operating point table is converted from the common value in
>> extracted script.fex from many A33 board/tablets.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Icenowy Zheng <icenowy@...c.xyz>
>> ---
>> Changes since v1:
>> - Fix format problem (blank lines).
>> - Removed the 1.344GHz operating point, as it's overvoltage and overclocked.
>>
>> This patch depends on the following patchset:
>>
>> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2016-December/473962.html
>>
>> It's the v2 of the [PATCH 4/6] in this patchset.
>>
>> I think this operating point table may also apply to A23, as there's no
>> difference except the points over 1.2GHz between A23 and A33's stock dvfs table.
>>
>> But as A23 CCU may not have the necessary fixes, I won't add the table to A23
>> now.
>>
>> Chen-Yu, could you test the CCU fixes I described in the patchset above on A23,
>> then test this operating points table?
>>
>> If it's necessary, you can send out the CCU fixes and add one more patch that
>> moves this opp-v2 table to sun8i-a23-a33.dtsi .
>>
>>  arch/arm/boot/dts/sun8i-a33.dtsi | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  1 file changed, 35 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun8i-a33.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun8i-a33.dtsi
>> index 504996cbee29..0f5b2af72981 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun8i-a33.dtsi
>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun8i-a33.dtsi
>> @@ -46,7 +46,42 @@
>>  #include <dt-bindings/dma/sun4i-a10.h>
>>
>>  / {
>> +     cpu0_opp_table: opp_table0 {
>> +             compatible = "operating-points-v2";
>> +             opp-shared;
>> +
>> +             opp@...000000 {
>> +                     opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <648000000>;
>> +                     opp-microvolt = <1040000>;
>> +                     clock-latency-ns = <244144>; /* 8 32k periods */
>> +             };
>> +
>> +             opp@...000000 {
>> +                     opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <816000000>;
>> +                     opp-microvolt = <1100000>;
>> +                     clock-latency-ns = <244144>; /* 8 32k periods */
>> +             };
>> +
>> +             opp@...8000000 {
>> +                     opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1008000000>;
>> +                     opp-microvolt = <1200000>;
>> +                     clock-latency-ns = <244144>; /* 8 32k periods */
>> +             };
>> +
>> +             opp@...0000000 {
>> +                     opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1200000000>;
>> +                     opp-microvolt = <1320000>;
>> +                     clock-latency-ns = <244144>; /* 8 32k periods */
>> +             };
>> +     };
>> +
>>       cpus {
>> +             cpu0: cpu@0 {
>
> There's no need to duplicate the label here. I removed it and applied.

I think using the label to directly reference cpu0 would be better,
instead of duplicating the cpu@0 block.

ChenYu