On 6 January 2014 23:02, Nishanth Menon <nm@xxxxxx> wrote: > On 01/06/2014 03:51 PM, Joachim Eastwood wrote: >> On 6 January 2014 17:28, Nishanth Menon <nm@xxxxxx> wrote: >>> On 01/01/2014 04:37 PM, Joachim Eastwood wrote: > [...] >>>> I assume this would work but I don't have a 4430 board to test it on. >>>> Unsure about voltage range, but at least 1.0 to 1.4V covers the operation >>>> points for cpu in omap443xx.dtsi. >>> This will not work. 6030 does not allow voltage to be set over i2c1, >>> needs voltage controller/processor to work. >> >> Well, it allows the LDO regulators to be changed over i2c, but I guess >> the SMPS regulators are different. > > yes, they are different control paths. To give a relative history: > > (OMAP3)TWL5030 -> we can control SMPS from either i2c1 OR i2c_SR by > flipping a control bit - but only one path at a time. > (OMAP4)TWL6030 -> only i2c_SR control allowed for SMPS > (OMAP5)Palmas family -> we can control using i2c1 or i2c_SR -> so no > real need for using voltage controller for SMPS. > > that said, it is necessary to use SR path to ensure that AVS also > functions. which requires on OMAP4,3 to use i2c_SR. I see. Just one question regarding the tps63261 on 4460. What good is the gpio pin most boards have connected to the tps regulator (vsel1) when it can be controlled with i2c_SR? I have seen the pin being used in the u-boot code. So is it just for initial boot or would Linux also use it as well? >> >> Anyways, thanks for the information and bugzilla link with links to >> the patch postings on the mailing list. > > Glad to be of help. Thanks a lot. I'll go read up on all the patches you posted. Good luck with the upstreaming effort :) regards Joachim Eastwood -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
