Heiko,
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Heiko Stübner <heiko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 15. Mai 2014, 11:18:44 schrieb Doug Anderson:
>> Thomas,
>>
>> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 6:11 PM, Thomas Abraham <ta.omasab@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > From: Thomas Abraham <thomas.ab@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> > +static int exynos4210_armclk_pre_rate_change(struct clk_notifier_data
>> > *ndata, + struct exynos_cpuclk *armclk, void
>> > __iomem *base) +{
>> > + struct exynos4210_armclk_data *armclk_data = armclk->data;
>> > + unsigned long alt_prate = clk_get_rate(armclk->alt_parent);
>> > + unsigned long alt_div, div0, div1, tdiv0, mux_reg;
>> > + unsigned long cur_armclk_rate, timeout;
>> > + unsigned long flags;
>> > +
>> > + /* find out the divider values to use for clock data */
>> > + while (armclk_data->prate != ndata->new_rate) {
>> > + if (armclk_data->prate == 0)
>> > + return -EINVAL;
>> > + armclk_data++;
>> > + }
>> > +
>> > + div0 = armclk_data->div0;
>> > + div1 = armclk_data->div1;
>> > + if (readl(base + SRC_CPU) & EXYNOS4210_MUX_HPM_MASK) {
>> > + div1 = readl(base + DIV_CPU1) & EXYNOS4210_DIV1_HPM_MASK;
>> > + div1 |= ((armclk_data->div1) & ~EXYNOS4210_DIV1_HPM_MASK);
>> > + }
>> > +
>> > + /*
>> > + * if the new and old parent clock speed is less than the clock
>> > speed + * of the alternate parent, then it should be ensured that
>> > at no point + * the armclk speed is more than the old_prate until
>> > the dividers are + * set.
>> > + */
>> > + tdiv0 = readl(base + DIV_CPU0);
>> > + cur_armclk_rate = ndata->old_rate / EXYNOS4210_ARM_DIV1(tdiv0) /
>> > + EXYNOS4210_ARM_DIV2(tdiv0);
>> > + if (alt_prate > cur_armclk_rate) {
>> > + alt_div = _calc_div(alt_prate, cur_armclk_rate);
>> > + _exynos4210_set_armclk_div(base, alt_div);
>> > + div0 |= alt_div;
>>
>> Don't you need to up the voltage here, too? ...I haven't reviewed
>> this whole patch (so perhaps it's elsewhere in the patch or in the
>> series), but I stumbled upon this while trying to solve a different
>> problem and figured I'd check...
>
> setting the voltage should be done by the cpufreq driver like cpufreq-cpu0 -
> whose usage this series intents to allow.
>
> As I've hijacked Thomas' concept for my current rockchip clock work, I've
> already seen this working nicely :-) .
I guess I should have been more clear. I was talking more
specifically about upping the voltage as part of the mux switch in the
case that alt_prate > cur_armclk_rate.
...if you're switching from 200MHz to 300MHz and the alt_prate is
800MHz, you need to account for that fact. The code here accounts for
the fact in setting the "armclk_div", but (I don't think) it accounts
for the fact that 800MHz will need a higher voltage.
As per a separate discussion, a clean solution might be to move the
mux switching to the core of CPU_FREQ. That would have the side
effect of also making it very easy to send notifications.
-Doug
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cpufreq" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
