[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200406081601.3y6fwb7czr2xdkep@gilmour.lan>
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2020 10:16:01 +0200
From: Maxime Ripard <maxime@...no.tech>
To: Clément Péron <peron.clem@...il.com>
Cc: Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-sunxi <linux-sunxi@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/7] arm64: dts: allwinner: h6: Add GPU Operating
Performance Points table
On Sun, Apr 05, 2020 at 07:35:58PM +0200, Clément Péron wrote:
> Add an Operating Performance Points table for the GPU to
> enable Dynamic Voltage & Frequency Scaling on the H6.
>
> Signed-off-by: Clément Péron <peron.clem@...il.com>
> ---
> .../boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-h6-gpu-opp.dtsi | 74 +++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 74 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-h6-gpu-opp.dtsi
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-h6-gpu-opp.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-h6-gpu-opp.dtsi
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..4a1814844fe0
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-h6-gpu-opp.dtsi
> @@ -0,0 +1,74 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0+ OR MIT)
> +// Copyright (C) 2020 Clément Péron <peron.clem@...il.com>
> +
> +/ {
> + gpu_opp_table: opp_table1 {
A node name is supposed to be a generic description, so what about
using gpu-opp-table (and cpu-opp-table) instead?
> + compatible = "operating-points-v2";
> +
> + opp@...000000 {
> + opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <756000000>;
> + opp-microvolt = <1040000>;
> + };
> + opp@...000000 {
> + opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <624000000>;
> + opp-microvolt = <950000>;
> + };
Ordering by ascending frequency would be great here.
Also, why did you need to create a new DTSI for it? Is there some
downside to enabling it for all the users?
Maxime
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists