linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: rockchip: Remove overdrive-mode OPPs from RK3588J SoC dtsi

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]

Message-ID: <17b55e889838f2c989bd0efc6528801b@manjaro.org>
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2025 11:33:53 +0100
From: Dragan Simic <dsimic@...jaro.org>
To: Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz@...rry.de>
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, Alexey Charkov
 <alchark@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: rockchip: Remove overdrive-mode OPPs from
 RK3588J SoC dtsi

On 2025-03-24 11:20, Quentin Schulz wrote:
> On 3/24/25 10:53 AM, Dragan Simic wrote:
>> On 2025-03-24 10:23, Quentin Schulz wrote:
>>> On 3/23/25 11:19 AM, Dragan Simic wrote:
>>>> On 2025-03-21 10:53, Quentin Schulz wrote:
>>>>> On 3/21/25 4:28 AM, Dragan Simic wrote:
>>>>>> The differences in the vendor-approved CPU and GPU OPPs for the 
>>>>>> standard
>>>>>> Rockchip RK3588 variant [1] and the industrial Rockchip RK3588J 
>>>>>> variant [2]
>>>>>> come from the latter, presumably, supporting an extended 
>>>>>> temperature range
>>>>>> that's usually associated with industrial applications, despite 
>>>>>> the two SoC
>>>>>> variant datasheets specifying the same upper limit for the allowed 
>>>>>> ambient
>>>>>> temperature for both variants.  However, the lower temperature 
>>>>>> limit is
>>>>> 
>>>>> RK3588 is rated for 0-80°C, RK3588J for -40-85°C, c.f. Recommended
>>>>> Operating Conditions, Table 3-2, Ambient Operating Temperature.
>>>> 
>>>> Indeed, which is why I specifically wrote "specifying the same upper
>>>> limit", because having a lower negative temperature limit could 
>>>> hardly
>>>> put the RK3588J in danger of overheating or running hotter. :)
>>> 
>>> """
>>> despite the two SoC variant datasheets specifying the same upper 
>>> limit
>>> for the allowed temperature for both variants
>>> """
>>> 
>>> is incorrect. The whole range is different, yes it's only a 5°C
>>> difference for the upper limit, but they still are different.
>> 
>> I just commented on this separately, with a couple of datasheet
>> screenshots, before I saw your latest response.  Please, have
>> a look at that message.
> 
> I see, I had a v1.3 datasheet opened:
> 
> https://github.com/FanX-Tek/rk3588-TRM-and-Datasheet/blob/master/Rockchip_RK3588_Datasheet_V1.3-20220328.pdf

Yup, the v1.6 of the RK3588 datasheet increased the upper ambient
temperature limit from 80 to 85 oC.

> Interestingly, it seems the RK3588S (still?) has a smaller operating 
> range:
> 
> https://www.armboard.cn/download/Rockchip_RK3588S_Datasheet_V1.6-20240821.pdf

Oh, that's quite interesting, I had the v1.5 as the newest version.
The v1.6 of the RK3588S datasheet actually lowered the upper ambient
temperature limit from 85 down to 80 oC.