linux-kernel - Re: [linux-sunxi] [PATCH v2] arm64: allwinner: a64: Add A64-OLinuXino initial support

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:   Mon, 14 Aug 2017 15:56:27 +0800
From:   Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>
To:     Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki@...il.com>
Cc:     Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>,
        Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>,
        Icenowy Zheng <icenowy@...c.io>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Michael Trimarchi <michael@...rulasolutions.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-sunxi <linux-sunxi@...glegroups.com>,
        Support - OLIMEX Ltd <support@...mex.com>,
        Jagan Teki <jagan@...rulasolutions.com>
Subject: Re: [linux-sunxi] [PATCH v2] arm64: allwinner: a64: Add A64-OLinuXino
 initial support

On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 3:34 PM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki@...il.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 12:38 PM, Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Sun, Aug 13, 2017 at 1:54 AM, Jagan Teki <jagannadh.teki@...il.com> wrote:
>>> From: Jagan Teki <jagan@...rulasolutions.com>
>>>
>>> OLimex A64-OLinuXino is an open-source hardware board
>>> using the Allwinner A64 SOC.
>>>
>>> OLimex A64-OLinuXino has
>>> - A64 Quad-core Cortex-A53 64bit
>>> - 1GB or 2GB RAM DDR3L @ 672Mhz
>>> - microSD slot and 4/8/16GB eMMC
>>> - Debug TTL UART
>>> - HDMI
>>> - LCD
>>> - IR receiver
>>> - 5V DC power supply
>>
>> Have you tried out Ethernet?
>
> Not, tested yet. Will send separate patch.

OK.

[...]

>>> +
>>> +&reg_aldo2 {
>>> +       regulator-always-on;
>>> +       regulator-min-microvolt = <3300000>;
>>> +       regulator-max-microvolt = <3300000>;
>>
>> Schematic says 1.8V?
>
> I saw ALD02 VCC-PL=3.3v on schematic.

Ah. I see they changed it in a rev. B. Lets use 3.3V then.

>>
>>> +       regulator-name = "vcc-pl";
>>> +};
>>> +
>>> +&reg_aldo3 {
>>> +       regulator-always-on;
>>> +       regulator-min-microvolt = <3000000>;
>>> +       regulator-max-microvolt = <3000000>;
>>> +       regulator-name = "vcc-pll-avcc";
>>> +};
>>> +
>>> +&reg_dcdc1 {
>>> +       regulator-always-on;
>>> +       regulator-min-microvolt = <3300000>;
>>> +       regulator-max-microvolt = <3300000>;
>>> +       regulator-name = "vcc-3v3";
>>> +};
>>> +
>>> +&reg_dcdc2 {
>>> +       regulator-always-on;
>>> +       regulator-min-microvolt = <1100000>;
>>> +       regulator-max-microvolt = <1100000>;
>>
>> The SoC has a wider range than a fixed voltage for the CPUs.
>
> So, max 1.1v can't enough CPUs? thought similar behavior with pine64?

The recommended operating conditions says 1.04 ~ 1.3 V for CPUx,
while the typical voltage is 1.1V. The regulator constraints should
match the datasheet, especially for power rails that are involved in
DVFS.

ChenYu