From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755801AbcLSNkr (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Dec 2016 08:40:47 -0500 Received: from mailout1.samsung.com ([203.254.224.24]:51114 "EHLO mailout1.samsung.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755637AbcLSNkm (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Dec 2016 08:40:42 -0500 X-AuditID: b6c32a3d-f79a36d000004dcf-43-5857e3578cf6 Message-id: <5857E21F.2080903@samsung.com> Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2016 19:05:27 +0530 From: Alim Akhtar User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0 MIME-version: 1.0 To: Krzysztof Kozlowski , Doug Anderson Cc: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz , Javier Martinez Canillas , Arjun K V , Kukjin Kim , Rob Herring , Mark Rutland , Russell King , Andreas Faerber , Thomas Abraham , Ben Gamari , linux-samsung-soc , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: Add missing CPU frequencies for Exynos5422/5800 In-reply-to: <20161216073720.GA3489@kozik-lap> Content-type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFjrIJsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsWy7bCmrm744/AIgw932C2aNxVbLF+5i8Vi 44z1rBaz5t9lsZh/5ByrxdllB9ks3rxdw2TR//g1s8X58xvYLTY9vsZqcXnXHDaLz71HGC1m nN/HZHFo6l5Gi6XXLzJZtO49wm7RsYzRQdBjzbw1jB6Xr11k9pjdcJHFY9OqTjaPzUvqPbb0 32X36NuyitHjzG9nj82nqz0+b5IL4IpKtclITUxJLVJIzUvOT8nMS7dV8g6Od443NTMw1DW0 tDBXUshLzE21VXLxCdB1y8wBekZJoSwxpxQoFJBYXKykb2dTlF9akqqQkV9cYqsUbWhopGdo YK5nZGSkZ2IUa2VkClSSkJpxvPU6c0GjeMWfu++YGhhXCnUxcnJICJhIXHj3jgnCFpO4cG89 WxcjF4eQwA5GiSVnl7NCOJ8ZJT5cOMwI03Fu511miMQGRomN+7qYQRK8AloSe9evYgGxWQRU JZac/ABmswloS9ydvgVshahAhMThKafYIeoFJU7OfAJWIyIQLLFyG0g9FwezwE1WiZ2tM8C2 CQsESEy+8h+ogYODU0BPYscVLRCTWcBKYvoJT5AKZgF5ie1v54DdIyHQyiHRd/wJWLmEgKzE pgPMEDe7SEw+PRnKFpZ4dXwLO4QtJdH88QMrRG87o8S9Ce+gnBmMEp1r30LDxV7iwJU5LBDb +CTefe1hhVjAK9HRBg1GD4krb3uhAeQocfbraxZIAB1kknh0/DH7BEa5WUh+noXwwywkPyxg ZF7FKJZaUJybnlpsWGCpV5yYW1yal66XnJ+7iRGcfLVsdzB+OedziFGAg1GJh1fhS1iEEGti WXFl7iFGCQ5mJRHejffCI4R4UxIrq1KL8uOLSnNSiw8xmgKjZCKzlGhyPjAz5JXEG5qYGZoY mRiYm1lYmCiJ8y5rtI4QEkhPLEnNTk0tSC2C6WPi4JRqYOyT2zUlWUPqjuDClIhIgQMnuovP lUy4O6fmpfo285Wc9Ub7tl5R+ZK0tgqY3azKHto2PGqa7pi3I1RW6bJVRbnHmmOdM+6UZUWd ZGc8d8bd+l90OkfBKhODU7+fpdSqtZTKhLUfuH/JPErR/VWxUV+UqO0jb4XgGoZnX1ctrgxz ytu7J3itEktxRqKhFnNRcSIA3qh1ndQDAAA= X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFnrDIsWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsWSneMpo7voUXiEwZV+OYvmTcUWy1fuYrHY OGM9q8Ws+XdZLOYfOcdqcXbZQTaLN2/XMFn0P37NbHH+/AZ2i02Pr7FaXN41h83ic+8RRosZ 5/cxWRyaupfRYun1i0wWrXuPsFt0LGN0EPRYM28No8flaxeZPWY3XGTx2LSqk81j85J6jy39 d9k9+rasYvQ489vZY/Ppao/Pm+QCuKLcbDJSE1NSixRS85LzUzLz0m2VQkPcdC2UFPISc1Nt lSJ0fUOClBTKEnNKgTwjAzTg4BzgHqykb5fglnG89TpzQaN4xZ+775gaGFcKdTFyckgImEic 23mXGcIWk7hwbz0biC0ksI5RorlLBcTmFdCS2Lt+FQuIzSKgKrHk5Acwm01AW+Lu9C1MILao QJjEx6Pr2CDqBSVOznwCViMiECzxeOsaoPlcHMwC91kl/j37DLZMWMBP4tnxt6wgCSGB7UwS K2Z3AzkcHJwCehI7rmiB1DALmEl0be1ihLDlJba/ncM8gZF/FpIds5CUzUJStoCReRWjWGpB cW56bnGBgaFecWJucWleul5yfu4mRmBMbzusJLaDsW2F1yFGAQ5GJR7eE5fCI4RYE8uKK3MP MUpwMCuJ8G68BxTiTUmsrEotyo8vKs1JLT7EaAoMg4nMUqLJ+cB0k1cSb2hiamFhYWJpbGxs YaIkzhs7/Vm4kEB6YklqdmpqQWoRTB8TB6dUA2NOnu6JVMFtEy651xaefMv/auqHAz7nFmxk 8Wy8n+T/nV1xMsupa9NWvFY6vGj34wURd4tnmBt///u5IXhPU8bGQ2WefLWRbMEJQUuc9z0r Z/Red03iZ4GTmKTH3Aqek0tiZ/KeS1t63sYyJ2q/r0behwP7kpJ1N/3jSvNrUy0q2J/1ftEB kyQlluKMREMt5qLiRABJqq3v/wIAAA== X-MTR: 20000000000000000@CPGS X-CMS-MailID: 20161219134038epcas1p41460330f9834ea2d3889a058c3ddd96c X-Msg-Generator: CA X-Sender-IP: 182.195.34.22 X-Local-Sender: =?UTF-8?B?7JWM66a8G1NTSVItVHVybiBLZXkgU29sdXRpb25zG+yCvA==?= =?UTF-8?B?7ISx7KCE7J6QGy4vU2VuaW9yIENoaWVmIEVuZ2luZWVy?= X-Global-Sender: =?UTF-8?B?QUxJTSBBS0hUQVIbU1NJUi1UdXJuIEtleSBTb2x1dGlvbnMb?= =?UTF-8?B?U2Ftc3VuZyBFbGVjdHJvbmljcxsuL1NlbmlvciBDaGllZiBFbmdpbmVlcg==?= X-Sender-Code: =?UTF-8?B?QzEwG1NXQUhRG0MxMElEMDdJRDAxMDk5Nw==?= CMS-TYPE: 101P DLP-Filter: Pass X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-HopCount: 7 X-CMS-RootMailID: 20161213191823epcas5p346582b73ad9b401d9e773a1b076f1f61 X-RootMTR: 20161213191823epcas5p346582b73ad9b401d9e773a1b076f1f61 References: <5220084.l31t5oJbsy@amdc3058> <26ffeee4-ff43-b3d3-3267-5fcbc50e2974@osg.samsung.com> <2340115.HEG9AYUCMD@amdc3058> <20161216073720.GA3489@kozik-lap> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, On 12/16/2016 01:07 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 04:52:58PM -0800, Doug Anderson wrote: >>> [ I added Arjun to Cc:, maybe he can help in explaining this issue >>> (unfortunately Inderpal's email is no longer working). ] >>> >>> Please also note that on Exynos5422/5800 SoCs the same ARM rail >>> voltage is used for 1.9 GHz & 2.0 GHz OPPs as for the 1.8 GHz one. >>> IOW if the problem exists it is already present in the mainline >>> kernel. >> >> Interesting. In the ChromeOS tree I see significantly higher voltages >> needed... Note that one might naively look at >> . >> >> 1362500, /* L0 2100 */ >> 1312500, /* L1 2000 */ >> >> ..but, amazingly enough those voltages aren't used at all. Surprise! >> >> I believe that the above numbers are actually not used and the ASV >> numbers are used instead. See >> >> >> { 2100000, >> 1350000, 1350000, 1350000, 1350000, 1350000, >> 1337500, 1325000, 1312500, 1300000, 1287500, >> 1275000, 1262500, 1250000, 1237500 }, >> >> I believe that interpretation there is: some bins of the CPU can run >> at 2.1 GHz just fine at 1.25 V but others need up to 1.35V. > > That is definitely the case. One could just look at vendors ASV table > (for 1.9 GHz): > { 1900000, 1300000, 1287500, 1262500, 1237500, 1225000, 1212500, > 1200000, 1187500, 1175000, 1162500, 1150000, > 1137500, 1125000, 1112500, 1112500}, > > The theoretical difference is up to 1.875V! From my experiments I saw > BIN1 chips which should be the same... but some working on 1.2V, some on > 1.225V (@1.9 GHz). I didn't see any requiring higher voltages but that > does not mean that there aren't such... > >> ...so if you're running at 2.1 GHz at 1.25V then perhaps you're just >> running on a CPU from a nice bin? > > Would be nice to see a dump of PKG_ID and AUX_INFO chipid registers > along with name of tested board. Because the "Tested on XU3" is not > sufficient. > I agree, we should be dumping PKG_ID and other chip info to know on which BIN sample this patch is tested on... As far as Peach-{pit/pi} boards are concerns, this is what I can remember: 1> 5420 (PIT) -> max recommended target frequency is 1800 MHz for A15 2> 5800 (PI)-> max recommended target frequency can go upto 2000 MHz, with INT rail locking. INT rail locking schemes never made to mainline, so to be safer side instead of bumping the clock and voltages better to keep it at safer range for pit and pi, probably thats why it was kept at 1800MHz. I am not sure if the same limitation applies to Odroid-XU3 samples. > Best regards, > Krzysztof > > > From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alim Akhtar Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: Add missing CPU frequencies for Exynos5422/5800 Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2016 19:05:27 +0530 Message-ID: <5857E21F.2080903@samsung.com> References: <5220084.l31t5oJbsy@amdc3058> <26ffeee4-ff43-b3d3-3267-5fcbc50e2974@osg.samsung.com> <2340115.HEG9AYUCMD@amdc3058> <20161216073720.GA3489@kozik-lap> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-reply-to: <20161216073720.GA3489@kozik-lap> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Krzysztof Kozlowski , Doug Anderson Cc: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz , Javier Martinez Canillas , Arjun K V , Kukjin Kim , Rob Herring , Mark Rutland , Russell King , Andreas Faerber , Thomas Abraham , Ben Gamari , linux-samsung-soc , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org Hi, On 12/16/2016 01:07 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 04:52:58PM -0800, Doug Anderson wrote: >>> [ I added Arjun to Cc:, maybe he can help in explaining this issue >>> (unfortunately Inderpal's email is no longer working). ] >>> >>> Please also note that on Exynos5422/5800 SoCs the same ARM rail >>> voltage is used for 1.9 GHz & 2.0 GHz OPPs as for the 1.8 GHz one. >>> IOW if the problem exists it is already present in the mainline >>> kernel. >> >> Interesting. In the ChromeOS tree I see significantly higher voltages >> needed... Note that one might naively look at >> . >> >> 1362500, /* L0 2100 */ >> 1312500, /* L1 2000 */ >> >> ..but, amazingly enough those voltages aren't used at all. Surprise! >> >> I believe that the above numbers are actually not used and the ASV >> numbers are used instead. See >> >> >> { 2100000, >> 1350000, 1350000, 1350000, 1350000, 1350000, >> 1337500, 1325000, 1312500, 1300000, 1287500, >> 1275000, 1262500, 1250000, 1237500 }, >> >> I believe that interpretation there is: some bins of the CPU can run >> at 2.1 GHz just fine at 1.25 V but others need up to 1.35V. > > That is definitely the case. One could just look at vendors ASV table > (for 1.9 GHz): > { 1900000, 1300000, 1287500, 1262500, 1237500, 1225000, 1212500, > 1200000, 1187500, 1175000, 1162500, 1150000, > 1137500, 1125000, 1112500, 1112500}, > > The theoretical difference is up to 1.875V! From my experiments I saw > BIN1 chips which should be the same... but some working on 1.2V, some on > 1.225V (@1.9 GHz). I didn't see any requiring higher voltages but that > does not mean that there aren't such... > >> ...so if you're running at 2.1 GHz at 1.25V then perhaps you're just >> running on a CPU from a nice bin? > > Would be nice to see a dump of PKG_ID and AUX_INFO chipid registers > along with name of tested board. Because the "Tested on XU3" is not > sufficient. > I agree, we should be dumping PKG_ID and other chip info to know on which BIN sample this patch is tested on... As far as Peach-{pit/pi} boards are concerns, this is what I can remember: 1> 5420 (PIT) -> max recommended target frequency is 1800 MHz for A15 2> 5800 (PI)-> max recommended target frequency can go upto 2000 MHz, with INT rail locking. INT rail locking schemes never made to mainline, so to be safer side instead of bumping the clock and voltages better to keep it at safer range for pit and pi, probably thats why it was kept at 1800MHz. I am not sure if the same limitation applies to Odroid-XU3 samples. > Best regards, > Krzysztof > > > From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: alim.akhtar@samsung.com (Alim Akhtar) Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2016 19:05:27 +0530 Subject: [PATCH] ARM: dts: Add missing CPU frequencies for Exynos5422/5800 In-Reply-To: <20161216073720.GA3489@kozik-lap> References: <5220084.l31t5oJbsy@amdc3058> <26ffeee4-ff43-b3d3-3267-5fcbc50e2974@osg.samsung.com> <2340115.HEG9AYUCMD@amdc3058> <20161216073720.GA3489@kozik-lap> Message-ID: <5857E21F.2080903@samsung.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi, On 12/16/2016 01:07 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 04:52:58PM -0800, Doug Anderson wrote: >>> [ I added Arjun to Cc:, maybe he can help in explaining this issue >>> (unfortunately Inderpal's email is no longer working). ] >>> >>> Please also note that on Exynos5422/5800 SoCs the same ARM rail >>> voltage is used for 1.9 GHz & 2.0 GHz OPPs as for the 1.8 GHz one. >>> IOW if the problem exists it is already present in the mainline >>> kernel. >> >> Interesting. In the ChromeOS tree I see significantly higher voltages >> needed... Note that one might naively look at >> . >> >> 1362500, /* L0 2100 */ >> 1312500, /* L1 2000 */ >> >> ..but, amazingly enough those voltages aren't used at all. Surprise! >> >> I believe that the above numbers are actually not used and the ASV >> numbers are used instead. See >> >> >> { 2100000, >> 1350000, 1350000, 1350000, 1350000, 1350000, >> 1337500, 1325000, 1312500, 1300000, 1287500, >> 1275000, 1262500, 1250000, 1237500 }, >> >> I believe that interpretation there is: some bins of the CPU can run >> at 2.1 GHz just fine at 1.25 V but others need up to 1.35V. > > That is definitely the case. One could just look at vendors ASV table > (for 1.9 GHz): > { 1900000, 1300000, 1287500, 1262500, 1237500, 1225000, 1212500, > 1200000, 1187500, 1175000, 1162500, 1150000, > 1137500, 1125000, 1112500, 1112500}, > > The theoretical difference is up to 1.875V! From my experiments I saw > BIN1 chips which should be the same... but some working on 1.2V, some on > 1.225V (@1.9 GHz). I didn't see any requiring higher voltages but that > does not mean that there aren't such... > >> ...so if you're running at 2.1 GHz at 1.25V then perhaps you're just >> running on a CPU from a nice bin? > > Would be nice to see a dump of PKG_ID and AUX_INFO chipid registers > along with name of tested board. Because the "Tested on XU3" is not > sufficient. > I agree, we should be dumping PKG_ID and other chip info to know on which BIN sample this patch is tested on... As far as Peach-{pit/pi} boards are concerns, this is what I can remember: 1> 5420 (PIT) -> max recommended target frequency is 1800 MHz for A15 2> 5800 (PI)-> max recommended target frequency can go upto 2000 MHz, with INT rail locking. INT rail locking schemes never made to mainline, so to be safer side instead of bumping the clock and voltages better to keep it at safer range for pit and pi, probably thats why it was kept at 1800MHz. I am not sure if the same limitation applies to Odroid-XU3 samples. > Best regards, > Krzysztof > > >