Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm: dts: imx6dl: correct cpufreq volt/freq table

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




Am Freitag, den 05.12.2014, 16:23 +0800 schrieb Anson Huang:
> Currently the cpufreq volt/freq table we used is
> for LDO enable mode, according to latest datasheet
> Rev. 3, 03/2014, the volt/freq table is as below:
> 
> LDO enabled(min value):
> 996MHz: VDDARM: 1.225V, VDDSOC: 1.150V;
> 792MHz: VDDARM: 1.150V, VDDSOC: 1.150V;
> 396MHz: VDDARM: 1.050V, VDDSOC: 1.150V;

>From which datasheet is this? I find it unlikely that the LDO enabled
values are not larger than the LDO bypassed ones. I just had a look at
the "i.MXSolo/6DualLite Automotive and Infotainment Applications
Processors" Datasheet (IMX6SDLAEC) Rev. 3, 03/2014 and the "i.MX
6Solo/6DualLite Applications Processors for Consumer Products" Datasheet
(IMX6SDLCEC) Rev. 3, 03/2014, and they both have different values in
Table 9 (Operating Ranges) for the LDO enabled case:

LDO enabled(min value):
996MHz: VDDARM: 1.350V, VDDSOC: 1.275V;
792MHz: VDDARM: 1.275V, VDDSOC: 1.275V;
396MHz: VDDARM: 1.175V, VDDSOC: 1.275V;

> LDO bypassed(min value):
> 996MHz: VDDARM: 1.250V, VDDSOC: 1.150V;
> 792MHz: VDDARM: 1.150V, VDDSOC: 1.150V;
> 396MHz: VDDARM: 1.050V, VDDSOC: 1.150V;
> 
> Adding 25mV to cover board IR drop, for LDO enabled
> mode of 996MHz, VDDARM should be 1.250V, so this
> patch updates it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Anson Huang <b20788@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

regards
Philipp

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Device Tree Compilter]     [Device Tree Spec]     [Linux Driver Backports]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux PCI Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Yosemite Backpacking]
  Powered by Linux