[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <33f8430e-0adc-4060-afb5-2cc5c79c8dec@arm.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2024 18:51:48 +0000
From: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
To: Dragan Simic <dsimic@...jaro.org>
Cc: linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org, heiko@...ech.de,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, robh@...nel.org, krzk+dt@...nel.org,
conor+dt@...nel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: rockchip: Fix vdd_gpu voltage constraints on
PinePhone Pro
On 12/11/2024 2:36 pm, Dragan Simic wrote:
> Hello Robin,
>
> On 2024-11-12 15:19, Robin Murphy wrote:
>> On 10/11/2024 6:44 pm, Dragan Simic wrote:
>>> The regulator-{min,max}-microvolt values for the vdd_gpu regulator in
>>> the
>>> PinePhone Pro device dts file are too restrictive, which prevents the
>>> highest
>>> GPU OPP from being used, slowing the GPU down unnecessarily. Let's
>>> fix that
>>> by making the regulator-{min,max}-microvolt values less strict, using
>>> the
>>> voltage range that the Silergy SYR838 chip used for the vdd_gpu
>>> regulator is
>>> actually capable of producing. [1][2]
>>
>> Specifying the absolute limits which the regulator driver necessarily
>> already knows doesn't seem particularly useful... Moreover, the RK3399
>> datasheet specifies the operating range for GPU_VDD as 0.80-1.20V, so
>> at the very least, allowing the regulator to go outside that range
>> seems inadvisable.
>
> Indeed, which is why I already mentioned in the patch description
> that I do plan to update the constraints of all regulators to match
> the summary of the constraints of their consumers. Though, I plan
> to do that later, as a separate directory-wide cleanup, for which
> I must find and allocate a substantial amount of time, to make sure
> there will be no mistakes.
Sure, but even if every other DT needs fixing, that still doesn't make
it a good idea to deliberately introduce the same mistake to *this* DT
and thus create even more work to fix it again. There's no value in
being consistently wrong over inconsistently wrong - if there's
justification for changing this DT at all, change it to be right.
>> However there's a separate datasheet for the
>> RK3399-T variant, which does specify this 875-975mV range and a
>> maximum GPU clock of 600MHz, along with the same 1.5GHz max.
>> Cortex-A72 clock as advertised for RK3399S, so it seems quite possible
>> that these GPU constraints here are in fact intentional as well.
>> Obviously users are free to overclock and overvolt if they wish - I do
>> for my actively-cooled RK3399 board :) - but it's a different matter
>> for mainline to force it upon them.
>
> Well, maybe the RK3399S is the same in that regard as the RK3399-T,
> but maybe it actually isn't -- unfortunately, we don't have some
> official RK3399S datasheet that would provide us with the required
> information. As another, somewhat unrelated example, we don't have
> some official documentation to tell us is the RK3399S supposed not
> to have working PCI Express interface, which officially isn't present
> in the RK3399-T variant.
Looking back at the original submission, v2 *was* proposing the RK3399-T
OPPs, with the GPU capped at 600MHz, and it was said that those are what
PPP *should* be using[1]. It seems there was a semantic objection to
having a separate rk3399-t-opp.dtsi at the time, and when the main DTS
was reworked for v3 the 800MHz GPU OPP seems to have been overlooked.
However, since rk3399-t.dtsi does now exist anyway, it would seem more
logical to just use that instead of including rk3399.dtsi and then
overriding it to be pretty much equivalent to the T variant anyway.
Thanks,
Robin.
[1]
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-rockchip/CAN1fySWVVTeGHAD=_hFH+ZdcR_AEiBc0wqes9Y4VRzB=zcdvSw@mail.gmail.com/
> However, I fully agree that forcing any kind of an overclock is not
> what we want to do. Thus, I'll do my best, as I already noted in this
> thread, to extract the dtb from the "reference" Android build that
> Rockchip itself provided for the RK3399S-based PinePhone Pro. That's
> closest to the official documentation for the RK3399S variant that we
> can get our hands on.
>
>>> This also eliminates the following error messages from the kernel log:
>>>
>>> core: _opp_supported_by_regulators: OPP minuV: 1100000 maxuV:
>>> 1150000, not supported by regulator
>>> panfrost ff9a0000.gpu: _opp_add: OPP not supported by regulators
>>> (800000000)
>>>
>>> These changes to the regulator-{min,max}-microvolt values make the
>>> PinePhone
>>> Pro device dts consistent with the dts files for other Rockchip
>>> RK3399-based
>>> boards and devices. It's possible to be more strict here, by
>>> specifying the
>>> regulator-{min,max}-microvolt values that don't go outside of what
>>> the GPU
>>> actually may use, as the consumer of the vdd_gpu regulator, but those
>>> changes
>>> are left for a later directory-wide regulator cleanup.
>>>
>>> [1]
>>> https://files.pine64.org/doc/PinePhonePro/PinephonePro-Schematic-V1.0-20211127.pdf
>>> [2]
>>> https://www.t-firefly.com/download/Firefly-RK3399/docs/Chip%20Specifications/DC-DC_SYR837_838.pdf
>>>
>>> Fixes: 78a21c7d5952 ("arm64: dts: rockchip: Add initial support for
>>> Pine64 PinePhone Pro")
>>> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
>>> Signed-off-by: Dragan Simic <dsimic@...jaro.org>
>>> ---
>>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-pinephone-pro.dts | 4 ++--
>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-pinephone-pro.dts
>>> b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-pinephone-pro.dts
>>> index 1a44582a49fb..956d64f5b271 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-pinephone-pro.dts
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-pinephone-pro.dts
>>> @@ -410,8 +410,8 @@ vdd_gpu: regulator@41 {
>>> pinctrl-names = "default";
>>> pinctrl-0 = <&vsel2_pin>;
>>> regulator-name = "vdd_gpu";
>>> - regulator-min-microvolt = <875000>;
>>> - regulator-max-microvolt = <975000>;
>>> + regulator-min-microvolt = <712500>;
>>> + regulator-max-microvolt = <1500000>;
>>> regulator-ramp-delay = <1000>;
>>> regulator-always-on;
>>> regulator-boot-on;
Powered by blists - more mailing lists