Hi, On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 9:32 AM Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.barysh...@linaro.org> wrote: > > On Thu, 22 Feb 2024 at 17:04, Bjorn Andersson <quic_bjora...@quicinc.com> > wrote: > > > > On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 11:46:26AM +0200, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > > > On Thu, 22 Feb 2024 at 11:28, Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dyb...@linaro.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2/22/24 10:04, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 22 Feb 2024 at 10:56, Konrad Dybcio > > > > > <konrad.dyb...@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> On 2/22/24 00:41, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > > > > >>> On Thu, 22 Feb 2024 at 01:19, Bjorn Andersson > > > > >>> <quic_bjora...@quicinc.com> wrote: > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> The max frequency listed in the DPU opp-table is 506MHz, this is > > > > >>>> not > > > > >>>> sufficient to drive a 4k@60 display, resulting in constant > > > > >>>> underrun. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Add the missing MDP_CLK turbo frequency of 608MHz to the opp-table > > > > >>>> to > > > > >>>> fix this. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> I think we might want to keep this disabled for ChromeOS devices. > > > > >>> Doug? > > > > >> > > > > >> ChromeOS devices don't get a special SoC > > > > > > > > > > But they have the sc7280-chrome-common.dtsi, which might contain a > > > > > corresponding /delete-node/ . > > > > > > > > What does that change? The clock rates are bound to the > > > > SoC and the effective values are limited by link-frequencies > > > > or the panel driver. > > > > > > Preventing the DPU from overheating? Or spending too much power? > > > > > > > Perhaps I'm misunderstanding the implementation then, are we always > > running at the max opp? I thought the opp was selected based on the > > current need for performance? > > Yes. My concern was whether the Chrome people purposely skipped this > top/turbo freq for any reason. In such a case, surprising them by > adding it to all platforms might be not the best idea. I hope Doug can > comment here.
Thanks for thinking of us! In this case, I think the only users left of the sc7280 Chrome devices are folks like Rob and then a few folks on Qualcomm's display team (like Abhinav), so if they're happy with the change then I have no objections. In any case, I'm not aware of any reason why this would have been skipped for Chrome. The Chrome devices were always intended to support 4K so I assume this was an oversight and nothing more. ...of course, as Abhinav points out Chrome devices are currently limited to HBR2 + 2 lanes DP so they can't go 4K60 anyway. In any case, in case it matters, feel free to have: Acked-by: Douglas Anderson <diand...@chromium.org>
