Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 7:13 PM Kevin Hilman <khilman@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Anand Moon <linux.amoon@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >> > Hi Neil / Kevin, >> > >> > On Tue, 10 Dec 2019 at 14:13, Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> >> >> On 09/12/2019 23:12, Kevin Hilman wrote: >> >> > Anand Moon <linux.amoon@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >> > >> >> >> Some how this patch got lost, so resend this again. >> >> >> >> >> >> [0] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11136545/ >> >> >> >> >> >> This patch enable DVFS on GXBB Odroid C2. >> >> >> >> >> >> DVFS has been tested by running the arm64 cpuburn >> >> >> [1] https://github.com/ssvb/cpuburn-arm/blob/master/cpuburn-a53.S >> >> >> PM-QA testing >> >> >> [2] https://git.linaro.org/power/pm-qa.git [cpufreq testcase] >> >> >> >> >> >> Tested on latest U-Boot 2019.07-1 (Aug 01 2019 - 23:58:01 +0000) Arch Linux ARM >> >> > >> >> > Have you tested with the Harkernel u-boot? >> >> > >> >> > Last I remember, enabling CPUfreq will cause system hangs with the >> >> > Hardkernel u-boot because of improperly enabled frequencies, so I'm not >> >> > terribly inclined to merge this patch. >> > >> > HK u-boot have many issue with loading the kernel, with load address >> > *it's really hard to build the kernel for HK u-boot*, >> > to get the configuration correctly. >> > >> > Well I have tested with mainline u-boot with latest ATF . >> > I would prefer mainline u-boot for all the Amlogic SBC, since >> > they sync with latest driver changes. >> >> Yes, we would all prefer mainline u-boot, but the mainline kernel needs >> to support the vendor u-boot that is shipping with the boards. So >> until Hardkernel (and other vendors) switch to mainline u-boot we do not >> want to have upstream kernel defaults that will not boot with the vendor >> u-boot. >> >> We can always support these features, but they just cannot be enabled >> by default. > (I don't have an Odroid-C2 but I'm curious) > should Anand submit a patch to mainline u-boot instead? It would be in addition to $SUBJECT patch, not instead, I think. > the &scpi_clocks node could be enabled at runtime by mainline u-boot That would work, but I don't know about u-boot maintainers opinions on this kind of thing, so let's see what Neil thinks. Kevin
