On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 2:57 PM, Siarhei Siamashka <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, 19 Mar 2015 10:39:32 +0800 > Chen-Yu Tsai <[email protected]> wrote: > >> The Olimex A10-Lime is known to be unstable when running at 1008MHz. >> >> Signed-off-by: Chen-Yu Tsai <[email protected]> >> --- >> arch/arm/boot/dts/sun4i-a10-olinuxino-lime.dts | 14 ++++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun4i-a10-olinuxino-lime.dts >> b/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun4i-a10-olinuxino-lime.dts >> index 31dc2f1c3870..16ecb8938e19 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun4i-a10-olinuxino-lime.dts >> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun4i-a10-olinuxino-lime.dts >> @@ -74,6 +74,20 @@ >> status = "okay"; >> }; >> >> +&cpu0 { >> + /* The A10-Lime is known to be unstable when running at 1008 MHz */ >> + operating-points = < >> + /* kHz uV */ >> + 960000 1400000 >> + 912000 1400000 >> + 864000 1300000 >> + 720000 1200000 >> + 528000 1100000 >> + 312000 1000000 >> + 144000 900000 >> + >; >> +}; >> + >> &ehci0 { >> status = "okay"; >> }; > > Thanks for the patch. At least it should make my A10-OLinuXino-LIME > working without obvious failures out of the box (the U-Boot is still > another story though and there is a gap during boot up when the board > is running with unreliable settings, but the probability of a failure > is rather low). > > I should also mention that using 960MHz @1.4V does not fail, but it does > not have any safety headroom either (the cyan 'sun4i_poorlime' line > on the plot): > > > http://people.freedesktop.org/~siamashka/files/20140512/sunxi-cpufreq-plot.png > > On the other hand, my board is on the worst part of the spectrum (many > other a10-lime boards do not fail even at 1008MHz), so maybe having > extra safety headroom is less necessary. > > An interesting question is whether the same problem may be reproducible > on the Allwinner A10 devices other than A10-OLinuXino-LIME. My original > problem report > > https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg04343.html > > mentioned the A10-OLinuXino-LIME rev.A and introduced some sort of > a bias by itself. At least I have seen people saying something like > "my a10-lime revision is not rev.A, so it's none of my concern and > I'm not going to bother running any tests". So far we have accumulated > reports from 4 or 5 people having this reliability problem on their > A10-OLinuXino-LIME (various revisions, not just rev.A), but not > much from the other boards owners. > > Anyway, this particular patch is > Tested-by: Siarhei Siamashka <[email protected]> > Acked-by: Siarhei Siamashka <[email protected]>
Good to hear it works. Did you test all the settings? I copied the wrong settings, from sun5i-a13.dtsi instead of sun4i-a10.dtsi. I'll send a fixed version later. ChenYu -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "linux-sunxi" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
