Received: by 2002:ab2:710b:0:b0:1ef:a325:1205 with SMTP id z11csp1764712lql; Wed, 13 Mar 2024 07:37:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=2; AJvYcCX/nKIMdZILTXsUBlsmL/92m78VKx3Fr4ZOr8G4LyjzhT8Sn+O2YYNCe7J5uz4FxUjXFNyitdwH60B3w19UqW/NbeVASOZveCekDa5G8w== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGouy7YdUDTXVLXeMt4Ee3J3/lQ2c6cfzysiariZENcpHngKX4vZoaJfHidjHIhAyXoFl/S X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a20:9183:b0:1a1:8b4a:e443 with SMTP id v3-20020a056a20918300b001a18b4ae443mr4188865pzd.28.1710340642538; Wed, 13 Mar 2024 07:37:22 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from sv.mirrors.kernel.org (sv.mirrors.kernel.org. [139.178.88.99]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id s10-20020a63dc0a000000b005e4f1095585si9157507pgg.688.2024.03.13.07.37.22 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 13 Mar 2024 07:37:22 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-101626-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=neutral (body hash did not verify) header.i=@collabora.com header.s=mail header.b=wV45Rr4v; arc=fail (body hash mismatch); spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-101626-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="linux-kernel+bounces-101626-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org"; dmarc=fail (p=QUARANTINE sp=QUARANTINE dis=QUARANTINE) header.from=collabora.com Received: from smtp.subspace.kernel.org (wormhole.subspace.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by sv.mirrors.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1E2EC2810EB for ; Wed, 13 Mar 2024 14:37:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7966D8C1F; Wed, 13 Mar 2024 14:36:56 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=collabora.com header.i=@collabora.com header.b="wV45Rr4v" Received: from madrid.collaboradmins.com (madrid.collaboradmins.com [46.235.227.194]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F2F814A07; Wed, 13 Mar 2024 14:36:53 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=46.235.227.194 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1710340615; cv=none; b=lGraK+qijlyPcSHMvPS0K8le/63rAFsBxgc2bI8K4VKE6GZ/b/p4QkYGOt/cvMZQhunmZySPzhiOtOFGtirxQzLtgyTMplPVN90czdnEr34mnVoJrPeOTnm5R46MQdW6YrpjgPeMhBKYvLRjvyA6vJhbA9Jttm16SCRIdSh5TGE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1710340615; c=relaxed/simple; bh=aBISMkyzcuXC4tndXkf0VYcmI9kprzzcj/ehlqHMdAQ=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=CrJxc8VdFGc0tfJXf3KQviAC2BKw5mQ3bkbX6pT2yuBOOXbc9CNtxX62X/xLdXRGFosMuDgRZGbUBDfRdlsv/AkM3pGQhwPF6U4BTb7NVvpEzf7hL7vTpIO55dYyYh3TnRt8hVVX7o6L1fvJt0osuoQsgsEqoZ4uknNANYUvRSo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=collabora.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=collabora.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=collabora.com header.i=@collabora.com header.b=wV45Rr4v; arc=none smtp.client-ip=46.235.227.194 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=collabora.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=collabora.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=collabora.com; s=mail; t=1710340612; bh=aBISMkyzcuXC4tndXkf0VYcmI9kprzzcj/ehlqHMdAQ=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=wV45Rr4voGJHrKXICE5+Eye7hrS2Pjf//lLfPMsweUmrMtaGowHMg8I1ftEp0aoc6 vVBZcOLf4o11Mg5tTnufw6SyfR0TmnYh7euYN5U/mbmh4D+veduK3L1cVcQzJtfwf8 3xTrl9JpUKtiEXdqBnujwEENhAYfYbBGvY78+vuV4+LxRKjiguO64XhrhCNeecyRoN QZR3ZhhDixM01wErO5qokiWMlKaRyx4SfSpnoi9s4eVgvGyGB75R5QPDv7h5kpVTPk 4auppMOqkpTTs4wsJ/OuuvWTViAs6wdbnrHFPzTu7gtp0SfvfQWyasvBTJhcjCEcls O/G14egc519mg== Received: from [100.113.186.2] (cola.collaboradmins.com [195.201.22.229]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: kholk11) by madrid.collaboradmins.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9A15437813C4; Wed, 13 Mar 2024 14:36:51 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2024 15:36:50 +0100 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: mediatek: mt8192-asurada: Update min voltage constraint for Vgpu Content-Language: en-US To: Pin-yen Lin , Matthias Brugger Cc: Chen-Yu Tsai , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, =?UTF-8?Q?N=C3=ADcolas_F_=2E_R_=2E_A_=2E_Prado?= , devicetree@vger.kernel.org References: <20240313135157.98989-1-treapking@chromium.org> From: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno In-Reply-To: <20240313135157.98989-1-treapking@chromium.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Il 13/03/24 14:51, Pin-yen Lin ha scritto: > Although the minimum voltage listed on the GPU OPP table is 606250 uV, > the actual requested voltage could be even lower when the MTK Smart > Voltage Scaling (SVS) driver is enabled. > > Set the minimum voltage to 300000 uV because it's supported by the > regulator. > > Fixes: 3183cb62b033 ("arm64: dts: mediatek: asurada: Add SPMI regulators") > Signed-off-by: Pin-yen Lin Okay, that makes sense, I agree. ..but. The datasheet never mentions 0.3V as vmin - infact, it does mention that the vsel is selected as (0V +) 6250 * Vsel, but the brief spec says that for the standard configuration (in terms of HW), the Vmin is 0.4V and not 0.3. Reading through makes me think that it's not much about the buck providing an unstable output, but more about it starting to become inefficient under that value. This means that it is sensible to set, instead: regulator-min-microvolt = <400000>; Also, this is repeated on multiple platforms: can you please perform the same change also on MT8183, MT8186 and MT8195? P.S.: For MT6358, the Vmin for VGPU is 0.5V :-) Cheers, Angelo > --- > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8192-asurada.dtsi | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8192-asurada.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8192-asurada.dtsi > index 43d80334610a..5cc5100a7c40 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8192-asurada.dtsi > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8192-asurada.dtsi > @@ -1448,7 +1448,7 @@ regulators { > mt6315_7_vbuck1: vbuck1 { > regulator-compatible = "vbuck1"; > regulator-name = "Vgpu"; > - regulator-min-microvolt = <606250>; > + regulator-min-microvolt = <300000>; > regulator-max-microvolt = <800000>; > regulator-enable-ramp-delay = <256>; > regulator-allowed-modes = <0 1 2>;