>-----Original Message----- >From: Menon, Nishanth > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Cousson, Benoit >> Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 11:06 AM >> To: Pandita, Vikram; linux-omap@vger.kernel.org >> >> >From: Pandita, Vikram >> > >> > >> >Proposals for OPP table handling for OMAP34xx/35xx/36xx/44xx >> > >> >Thanks to all the community members for taking time for this discussion. >> >This will aid upsteaming of 35xx/36xx/44xx in coming future. >> > >> >Attendees: Kevin Hilman, Paul, Nishant M, Santosh, Madhu, Benoit, >> Rajendra, >> >Benoit, Vikram >> > >> >Problem Statement: >> > OMAP34xx has certain opp requirements (3420/3430/3440) >> > OMAP35xx reuses the opp's from 34xx >> > OMAP36xx has a totally new set of opps >> > OMAP44xx has a totally new set of opps >> > >> >Solution: >> > Align on a common approach to take for the Opp table definitions. >> > >> >Define Separate Tables for each family as follows: >> >Step 1: Go with this approach: >> > 3420(65nm) : new arrays [defer for now] >> > 3430/35xx(65nm) : new arrays ** >> > 3440(65nm) : new arrays [defer for now] >> > 3630(45nm) : new arrays >> > Omap4(45nm) : new arrays >> > >> > * new arrays = (mpu, dsp, l3) >> > ** Check this valid flag. Kevin can take this base on comments >> > http://marc.info/?l=linux-omap&m=125512448216071&w=2 >> > between 3430/35xx, opp's can be managed with a flag and same >> >table re-used >> > 35xx has requirement for 720Mhz opp >> > >> >Step 2: >> >Kevin suggestion: >> >Define accessor APIs get the OPPs >> >Check Users of accessor API >> > DVFS >> > constraints >> > sysfs debug >> > Define accessor api's eg: >> > index = get_opp(VDD1_OPP1); >> > num = get_max_opp(VDD1); >> > set_opp(index); >> >> I think we should as well change the naming and use the less confusing >> naming we are using on OMAP3630/4430. >> OPPs are now named using the performance delta from the nominal frequency. >> OPP25, OPP50, OPP80, OPP100, OPP120... >NAK for two reasons: >a) h/w changes language of OPP definitions every other silicons -> OPP100 >is not more informative than OPP1 or OPPX for that matter - with proper >comments, even something like >/* OPP25 - 25% of nominal performance */ >#define VDD1_OPP_REAAAALLLY_SLOW_OPP 1 >Makes sense.
Well, this is your point of view, but having a define named OPP100 is a little bit more informative, for my point of view, than OPP3 especially when the same OPP was named OPP1 in previous ES. Nevermind, it was just a quick and non intrusive fix to do but the next point will make it useless. >b) if you look at discussion - we really DON'T want to use OPP definitions >anymore - we would like folks to use frequency for precisely that reason - >it is frequency that matters in the system. I agree it is even better. FYI, and if you look at the discussion, that direction is not obvious at all... There is even a get_opp(VDD1_OPP1) in the email... What part of the email is explaining that? Maybe I missed it. >c) the field for OPP idx is probably redundant once we have proper APIs in >place. Agree. Regards, Benoit >> >> >Step 3: >> > Paul suggestion: >> > VSEL values in opp table should be in terms of voltage >> > Non TWL IC's need this >> > >> >Step4: >> > Paul suggestion: >> > VDD1 VDD2 dependencies for different chips >> > Inter-connect load predictor is absent on omap3 and hence VDD1-vdd2 >> >dependency >> > OMAP4 >> > interconnect loading can be measured from registers >> > Multi-cores dependency >> > >> >Step 5: >> > Paul suggestion: >> > Board files adding OPPs, Modifying OPPs >> > Eg: Pendora passing its own opp >> >> > > >Regards, >Nishanth Menon -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
