Hi, Hans de Goede schrieb am 27.07.2015 14:43: >>> I've a simular patch here: >>> >>> https://github.com/jwrdegoede/linux-sunxi/commit/6a30b7d5be6012b81e5e1439a444e41c0ac1afc1 >>> >>> I did not submit this upstream yet as it is part of a series to enable the >>> otg >>> controller on the bananapi which needs axp-usb-power-supply support for which >>> the actual powersupply driver changes are still pending. >> Oops, I see. Are you planning to submit this for 4.3 or later? > > I plan to submit this for 4.3. Ok, then I guess we can drop my patch. >>> IMHO we should just stick with the standard operating points unless we know >>> that there are stability issues with them (such as e.g. on the A10 OlinuxIno >>> Lime). >> I'd be fine with that as I don't have any stability issues with the lower >> voltages. What about the 1008MHz operating point that I "reintroduced"? It was >> dropped here [1] because there was no regulator support. > > That is in essence an overclocked setting, the max CPU voltage officially is > 1.4V, I do not think that we should provide any overclocked settings in the > official dts files. If people really want to overclock they will have to > modify there dts themselves IMHO. Personally, I would be fine with that. Even though I think, it might be good to have them in the official files just for convenience and because people who are used to the sunxi-3.4 kernels are used to having the 1008MHz opp (and it was in mainline for a short while, too). For those who don't want to use that setting, it's easier to limit the maximum in userspace compared to compiling a new device tree blob. But I do understand your point, so I guess it's just something that maintainers have to make a decision for. As I said, either way is fine for me. > > Can this be reenabled >> on board level (which means overriding the defaults inherited from >> sun7i-a20.dtsi) or should this be done at SOC level for all boards (which >> means we have to add regulator nodes for all boards in the first place)? > > Technically this is possible, but I do not think that it is a good idea. I guess the same applies here, too. It's something maintainers should have a common understanding on. I don't know how much variation there is among the A20 boards in terms of frequencies and voltages. If there is a lot, I'd say it would be desireable to have board-specific opp. The downside I see in my approach is that it impacts readability of the dts(i) files when settings are overridden further down the tree. Thanks and regards, Timo -- 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
