On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 12:43:13AM +0800, wens Tsai wrote: > >> On the side, I'm wondering if we can put the voltage ranges for > >> important regulators directly in the axp dtsi. It's likely most > >> boards follow the reference design, and will use the regulators > >> accordingly. > >> > >> We could also do this for A31/A31s paired with AXP221/AXP221s. > >> Since I already have a patch for axp221.dtsi, I can incorporate > >> the changes. > > > > That doesn't really work unfortunately. We're seeing some combination > > of the PMICs and the SoCs that have different boundaries, for example, > > while the AXP209 is used on the A10 and A20 that have an upper > > boundary of 1.4V for the CPU regulator, while it's also used with the > > R8 that has a limit at 1.3V. > > I understand. I'm just saying it's doable for the A31/AXP221 pair, > and the AXP223/A23/A33 pairs. I think we won't be seeing new chips > paired with them. The A80 and A83 both have their own companion > PMICs, and the H3 doesn't seem to use one in designs we've seen. > The A31 and A31s have the same tolerances, as do the A23 and A33.
Thing is, we can probably expect the same behaviour when the R* and H* designs will be out. I'd really just prefer to leave the glue between the PMIC and the SoC in the board DTS, and not make any assumption about what PMIC is associated with what SoC in the DTSI. Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com -- 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.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
