Update the cpu opp table for rk3399 op1.
Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <[email protected]>
---
arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-opp.dtsi | 12 ++++++------
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-opp.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-opp.dtsi
index dd82e16..92bd615 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-opp.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-opp.dtsi
@@ -52,27 +52,27 @@
};
opp01 {
opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <600000000>;
- opp-microvolt = <800000>;
+ opp-microvolt = <825000>;
};
opp02 {
opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <816000000>;
- opp-microvolt = <800000>;
+ opp-microvolt = <850000>;
};
opp03 {
opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1008000000>;
- opp-microvolt = <875000>;
+ opp-microvolt = <900000>;
};
opp04 {
opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1200000000>;
- opp-microvolt = <925000>;
+ opp-microvolt = <975000>;
};
opp05 {
opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1416000000>;
- opp-microvolt = <1050000>;
+ opp-microvolt = <1100000>;
};
opp06 {
opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1512000000>;
- opp-microvolt = <1125000>;
+ opp-microvolt = <1150000>;
};
};
--
2.7.4
Hi Caesar,
Am Montag, 24. April 2017, 14:18:50 CEST schrieb Caesar Wang:
> Update the cpu opp table for rk3399 op1.
Ideally this should contain something about the "why".
Are these new voltage settings safer to operate under?
No need to resend, please just clarify the reason.
Thanks
Heiko
>
> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <[email protected]>
> ---
>
> arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-opp.dtsi | 12 ++++++------
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-opp.dtsi
> b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-opp.dtsi index dd82e16..92bd615
> 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-opp.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-opp.dtsi
> @@ -52,27 +52,27 @@
> };
> opp01 {
> opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <600000000>;
> - opp-microvolt = <800000>;
> + opp-microvolt = <825000>;
> };
> opp02 {
> opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <816000000>;
> - opp-microvolt = <800000>;
> + opp-microvolt = <850000>;
> };
> opp03 {
> opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1008000000>;
> - opp-microvolt = <875000>;
> + opp-microvolt = <900000>;
> };
> opp04 {
> opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1200000000>;
> - opp-microvolt = <925000>;
> + opp-microvolt = <975000>;
> };
> opp05 {
> opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1416000000>;
> - opp-microvolt = <1050000>;
> + opp-microvolt = <1100000>;
> };
> opp06 {
> opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1512000000>;
> - opp-microvolt = <1125000>;
> + opp-microvolt = <1150000>;
> };
> };
在 2017年04月24日 16:26, Heiko Stübner 写道:
> Hi Caesar,
>
> Am Montag, 24. April 2017, 14:18:50 CEST schrieb Caesar Wang:
>> Update the cpu opp table for rk3399 op1.
> Ideally this should contain something about the "why".
> Are these new voltage settings safer to operate under?
The before opp table is for earlier batch of rk3399 SoCs, that's no
enough for the current and
newer batch of rk3399 op1. In order to suit for the rk3399 op1, we need
to little voltages changed.
-Caesar
>
> No need to resend, please just clarify the reason.
>
>
> Thanks
> Heiko
>
>> Signed-off-by: Caesar Wang <[email protected]>
>> ---
>>
>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-opp.dtsi | 12 ++++++------
>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-opp.dtsi
>> b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-opp.dtsi index dd82e16..92bd615
>> 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-opp.dtsi
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-opp.dtsi
>> @@ -52,27 +52,27 @@
>> };
>> opp01 {
>> opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <600000000>;
>> - opp-microvolt = <800000>;
>> + opp-microvolt = <825000>;
>> };
>> opp02 {
>> opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <816000000>;
>> - opp-microvolt = <800000>;
>> + opp-microvolt = <850000>;
>> };
>> opp03 {
>> opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1008000000>;
>> - opp-microvolt = <875000>;
>> + opp-microvolt = <900000>;
>> };
>> opp04 {
>> opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1200000000>;
>> - opp-microvolt = <925000>;
>> + opp-microvolt = <975000>;
>> };
>> opp05 {
>> opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1416000000>;
>> - opp-microvolt = <1050000>;
>> + opp-microvolt = <1100000>;
>> };
>> opp06 {
>> opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1512000000>;
>> - opp-microvolt = <1125000>;
>> + opp-microvolt = <1150000>;
>> };
>> };
>
>
>
>
Am Montag, 24. April 2017, 16:49:08 CEST schrieb Caesar Wang:
> 在 2017年04月24日 16:26, Heiko Stübner 写道:
> > Hi Caesar,
> >
> > Am Montag, 24. April 2017, 14:18:50 CEST schrieb Caesar Wang:
> >> Update the cpu opp table for rk3399 op1.
> >
> > Ideally this should contain something about the "why".
> > Are these new voltage settings safer to operate under?
>
> The before opp table is for earlier batch of rk3399 SoCs, that's no
> enough for the current and
> newer batch of rk3399 op1. In order to suit for the rk3399 op1, we need
> to little voltages changed.
just to make sure, this is also safe for all the non-chromebook rk3399 socs
(like the firefly and tv-boxes, etc), right?
Thanks
Heiko
Hi Heiko
2017-04-24 17:15 GMT+08:00 Heiko Stübner <[email protected]>:
> Am Montag, 24. April 2017, 16:49:08 CEST schrieb Caesar Wang:
>> 在 2017年04月24日 16:26, Heiko Stübner 写道:
>> > Hi Caesar,
>> >
>> > Am Montag, 24. April 2017, 14:18:50 CEST schrieb Caesar Wang:
>> >> Update the cpu opp table for rk3399 op1.
>> >
>> > Ideally this should contain something about the "why".
>> > Are these new voltage settings safer to operate under?
>>
>> The before opp table is for earlier batch of rk3399 SoCs, that's no
>> enough for the current and
>> newer batch of rk3399 op1. In order to suit for the rk3399 op1, we need
>> to little voltages changed.
>
> just to make sure, this is also safe for all the non-chromebook rk3399 socs
> (like the firefly and tv-boxes, etc), right?
This is only for op1. other 3399s should have a different opp table
>
>
> Thanks
> Heiko
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-rockchip mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip
Am Montag, 24. April 2017, 18:25:49 CEST schrieb Caesar Wang:
> 在 2017年04月24日 17:15, Heiko Stübner 写道:
> > Am Montag, 24. April 2017, 16:49:08 CEST schrieb Caesar Wang:
> >> 在 2017年04月24日 16:26, Heiko Stübner 写道:
> >>> Hi Caesar,
> >>>
> >>> Am Montag, 24. April 2017, 14:18:50 CEST schrieb Caesar Wang:
> >>>> Update the cpu opp table for rk3399 op1.
> >>>
> >>> Ideally this should contain something about the "why".
> >>> Are these new voltage settings safer to operate under?
> >>
> >> The before opp table is for earlier batch of rk3399 SoCs, that's no
> >> enough for the current and
> >> newer batch of rk3399 op1. In order to suit for the rk3399 op1, we need
> >> to little voltages changed.
> >
> > just to make sure, this is also safe for all the non-chromebook rk3399
> > socs
> > (like the firefly and tv-boxes, etc), right?
>
> No, just for chromebook.
>
> Maybe, we need support two table for rk3399 SoCs.
> For chromebook supporting 2GHz frequency and others support 1.8GHz
> frequency.
Definitly. So please move the chromebook opp-table to something like a rk3399-
op1-opp.dtsi and adapt rk3399-opp.dtsi to be safe for all rk3399 variants.
Thanks
Heiko
>
> For example:
> ....
> opp03 {
> opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <1008000000>;
> opp-microvolt = <925000 925000 1350000>;
> opp-microvolt-l0 = <925000 925000 1350000>;
> opp-microvolt-l1 = <900000 900000 1350000>;
> };
> ....
>
>
>
> -Caesar
>
> > Thanks
> > Heiko
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Linux-rockchip mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip