From: Rask Ingemann Lambertsen <rask@formelder.dk>
To: Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
devicetree <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com>,
Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: AXP808 vs. AXP806 debugged, no difference? (Was: [PATCH v6 5/5] ARM: dts: sun9i: Initial support for the Sunchip CX-A99 board)
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2017 22:28:03 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170217212802.erggx2hdjrmisfhn@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGb2v65gpJKs8yf35cHkowxjEYNYH33nZGtmM7E6rwfTPfPdug@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 11:08:59AM +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 5:16 AM, Rask Ingemann Lambertsen
> <rask@formelder.dk> wrote:
> > In summary: I'll propose a new property "extended-address" or so to the
> > existing "x-powers,axp806" compatible, because the axp808 does seem to have
> > the register at 0xff after all, it just needs a value of 0 instead of the 16
> > which drivers/mfd/axp20x.c as of recently is now writing unconditionally
> > to 0xff. A new "x-powers,axp808" compatible and new AXP808_ID is therefore
> > not needed. This should make for a simpler and smaller patch.
>
> It might be the same core as the AXP806, though without a datasheet to actually
> confirm it, it might be best to stick to a new compatible.
Yes, an extra compatible is cheap. Also, it occurs to me that either could
turn out to have features that the other one doesn't.
FWIW, both are 56-pin devices going by board photos. I'd say they differ in
the power-on voltages. On the AXP808, I've measured (in FEL mode, assuming
that the BROM doesn't have any PMIC code at all):
aldo1 3.0 V
aldo2 off
aldo3 off
bldo1 1.8 V
bldo2 0.9 V (here the AXP806 gives 1.8 V for DLL and PLL)
bldo3 off
bldo4 ? (haven't found it yet)
cldo1 3.3 V
cldo2 off
cldo3 off
dcdca 0.9 V
dcdcb 1.5 V
dcdcc 0.9 V
dcdcd 0.9 V
dcdce 3.3 V (AXP806 set to 2.1 V in Optimus and Cubieboard4 dts)
sw0 ? (haven't found it yet)
It would also explain why they were given the same chip ID, as from driver
point of view, they behave in the same way. The Allwinner kernel tree also
uses the same driver (confusingly called axp15) for both.
> However, we could add a new property "x-powers,master-mode". If the driver
> sees it, it would clear bit 4, instead of setting it. The hardware bit is
> latched from the external pin, so this would be per board.
Patch coming.
--
Rask Ingemann Lambertsen
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-02-17 21:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-02-08 23:29 [PATCH v2 0/5] arm: sun9i: Support AXP808 PMIC and Sunchip CX-A99 board Rask Ingemann Lambertsen
2017-01-22 17:33 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] regulator: axp20x: Add support for the AXP808 PMIC Rask Ingemann Lambertsen
2017-02-08 23:30 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] dts: mfd: axp20x: Add AXP806 to list of current AXP20x family members Rask Ingemann Lambertsen
2017-02-08 23:31 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] dts: mfd: axp20x: Add binding for the AXP808 Rask Ingemann Lambertsen
2017-02-08 23:32 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] mfd: axp20x: Add support for the AXP808 PMIC Rask Ingemann Lambertsen
2017-02-08 23:34 ` [PATCH v6 5/5] ARM: dts: sun9i: Initial support for the Sunchip CX-A99 board Rask Ingemann Lambertsen
2017-02-10 8:59 ` Maxime Ripard
2017-02-10 9:22 ` Chen-Yu Tsai
2017-02-14 5:55 ` Rask Ingemann Lambertsen
2017-02-14 23:35 ` Rask Ingemann Lambertsen
2017-02-16 18:32 ` Maxime Ripard
2017-02-16 21:16 ` AXP808 vs. AXP806 debugged, no difference? (Was: [PATCH v6 5/5] ARM: dts: sun9i: Initial support for the Sunchip CX-A99 board) Rask Ingemann Lambertsen
2017-02-17 3:08 ` Chen-Yu Tsai
2017-02-17 21:28 ` Rask Ingemann Lambertsen [this message]
2017-02-16 6:17 ` [PATCH v6 5/5] ARM: dts: sun9i: Initial support for the Sunchip CX-A99 board Rask Ingemann Lambertsen
2017-02-16 6:31 ` Chen-Yu Tsai
2017-02-16 18:29 ` Maxime Ripard
2017-02-19 20:12 ` Rask Ingemann Lambertsen
2017-02-21 23:27 ` Maxime Ripard
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=20170217212802.erggx2hdjrmisfhn@localhost \
--to=rask@formelder.dk \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lee.jones@linaro.org \
--cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=wens@csie.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).