Hi Neil, On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 1:53 PM Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 03/07/2019 01:47, Martin Blumenstingl wrote: > > Hi Neil, > > > > On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 11:13 AM Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> Add the OPP table taken from the vendor u200 and u211 DTS. > >> > >> The Amlogic G12A SoC seems to available in 3 types : > >> - low-speed: up to 1,8GHz > >> - mid-speed: up to 1,908GHz > >> - high-speed: up to 2.1GHz > >> > >> And the S905X2 opp voltages are slightly higher than the S905D2 > >> OPP voltages for the low-speed table. > >> > >> This adds the conservative OPP table with the S905X2 higher voltages > >> and the maximum low-speed OPP frequency. > > have you considered all three as separate voltage tables? > > you're other patches are assigning the OPP table to the CPU in the > > board.dts anyways, so it's easy to use different OPP tables for > > different boards > > We can't assume the board and the CPU type :-/ OK, should we assign the OPP table to the CPU cores then in the soc.dtsi (instead of board.dts like the other patches from this series do)? > Kevin told me about cpufreq policy, where we could add a policy reading the > eFUSE and changing the max frequency, then we could add the whole OPP table. we can still do that in a second step, so I'm all for starting with the "conservative" OPP table and then improve performance (by having detecting the SoC and using the correct OPP table) Martin