From: collinsd@codeaurora.org (David Collins)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 2/3] arm64: dts: qcom: sdm845-mtp: Add RPMh VRM/XOB regulators
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 16:01:35 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <05f5afbf-61cd-77e8-3a02-1166d1c1ad4f@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAD=FV=X5oVYYyZvTNZjvpY+Vss4TzpZwCzSsup0AJOcfAVhkzA@mail.gmail.com>
Hi,
On 07/10/2018 03:55 PM, Doug Anderson wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 3:32 PM, David Collins <collinsd@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>> On 07/10/2018 03:02 PM, Douglas Anderson wrote:
>> ...
>>> + vdd-s1-supply = <&vph_pwr>;
>>> + vdd-s2-supply = <&vph_pwr>;
>>> + vdd-s3-supply = <&vph_pwr>;
>>> + vdd-s4-supply = <&vph_pwr>;
>>> + vdd-s5-supply = <&vph_pwr>;
>>> + vdd-s6-supply = <&vph_pwr>;
>>> + vdd-s7-supply = <&vph_pwr>;
>>> + vdd-s8-supply = <&vph_pwr>;
>>> + vdd-s9-supply = <&vph_pwr>;
>>> + vdd-s10-supply = <&vph_pwr>;
>>> + vdd-s11-supply = <&vph_pwr>;
>>> + vdd-s12-supply = <&vph_pwr>;
>>> + vdd-s13-supply = <&vph_pwr>;
>>> + vdd-l1-l27-supply = <&vreg_s7a_1p025>;
>>> + vdd-l2-l8-l17-supply = <&vreg_s3a_1p35>;
>>> + vdd-l3-l11-supply = <&vreg_s7a_1p025>;
>>> + vdd-l4-l5-supply = <&vreg_s7a_1p025>;
>>> + vdd-l6-supply = <&vph_pwr>;
>>> + vdd-l7-l12-l14-l15-supply = <&vreg_s5a_2p04>;
>>> + vdd-l9-supply = <&vreg_bob>;
>>> + vdd-l10-l23-l25-supply = <&vreg_bob>;
>>> + vdd-l13-l19-l21-supply = <&vreg_bob>;
>>> + vdd-l16-l28-supply = <&vreg_bob>;
>>> + vdd-l18-l22-supply = <&vreg_bob>;
>>> + vdd-l20-l24-supply = <&vreg_bob>;
>>> + vdd-l26-supply = <&vreg_s3a_1p35>;
>>> + vin-lvs-1-2-supply = <&vreg_s4a_1p8>;
>>
>> I would suggest not specifying any of these regulator parent supplies in
>> device tree. RPMh will be enforcing all regulator parent-child
>> dependencies. Therefore, handling the dependencies in Linux is redundant.
>> It will result in additional RPMh requests as well as more time spent in
>> regulator framework calls. Overall, it will lead to slightly lower
>> performance. Note that while specifying the parent supplies results in
>> less efficient runtime behavior, it is not technically wrong so you could
>> keep them in place if you prefer.
>
> Interesting. ...so RPMh will automatically turn on parent regulators
> when their children are enabled (assuming that the parent regulator is
> also RPMh controlled)?
Yes, exactly. RPMh also ensures that the voltage of a parent regulator is
sufficient to meet minimum headroom voltage requirements of all
subregulated child regulators.
> Personally I'd still prefer to see Linux managing its own state and
> relying less on RPMh-automatic stuff, but I'd defer to Bjorn / Andy
> (or others) to override me.
Ok
Take care,
David
--
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-07-10 23:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-07-10 22:01 [PATCH 0/3] arm64: dts: sdm845: Add RPMh-regulators and usb Douglas Anderson
2018-07-10 22:02 ` [PATCH 1/3] arm64: dts: qcom: sdm845: Add USB-related nodes Douglas Anderson
2018-07-12 16:56 ` Doug Anderson
2018-07-10 22:02 ` [PATCH 2/3] arm64: dts: qcom: sdm845-mtp: Add RPMh VRM/XOB regulators Douglas Anderson
2018-07-10 22:32 ` David Collins
2018-07-10 22:55 ` Doug Anderson
2018-07-10 23:01 ` David Collins [this message]
2018-07-11 2:57 ` kbuild test robot
2018-07-10 22:02 ` [PATCH 3/3] arm64: dts: qcom: sdm845-mtp: Add nodes for USB Douglas Anderson
2018-08-10 21:51 [PATCH 0/3] arm64: dts: sdm845: Add RPMh-regulators and usb Douglas Anderson
2018-08-10 21:51 ` [PATCH 2/3] arm64: dts: qcom: sdm845-mtp: Add RPMh VRM/XOB regulators Douglas Anderson
2018-08-12 7:06 ` kbuild test robot
2018-08-20 18:18 ` Stephen Boyd
2018-08-22 17:38 ` Doug Anderson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=05f5afbf-61cd-77e8-3a02-1166d1c1ad4f@codeaurora.org \
--to=collinsd@codeaurora.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).