Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 27 Mar 2019 18:55:28 +0530 | From | Sibi Sankar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 4/9] dt-bindings: power: Add rpm power domain bindings for qcs404 |
| |
On 2019-03-25 09:51, Rajendra Nayak wrote: > On 3/24/2019 11:20 PM, Sibi Sankar wrote: >> From: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org> >> >> Add RPM Power domain bindings for the qcs404 family of SoC >> >> [sibis: Add supported rpmpd states for qcs404] >> Signed-off-by: Sibi Sankar <sibis@codeaurora.org> > > SoB ordering seems wrong.
will re-order them in v3
> >> Signed-off-by: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org> >> --- >> .../devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt | 1 + >> include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h | 22 >> +++++++++++++++++++ >> 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt >> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt >> index 980e5413d18f..172ccf940c5c 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/qcom,rpmpd.txt >> @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ which then translates it into a corresponding voltage >> on a rail >> Required Properties: >> - compatible: Should be one of the following >> * qcom,msm8996-rpmpd: RPM Power domain for the msm8996 family of >> SoC >> + * qcom,qcs404-rpmpd: RPM Power domain for the qcs404 family of SoC >> * qcom,sdm845-rpmhpd: RPMh Power domain for the sdm845 family of >> SoC >> - #power-domain-cells: number of cells in Power domain specifier >> must be 1. >> diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h >> b/include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h >> index 87d9c6611682..450378662944 100644 >> --- a/include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h >> +++ b/include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h >> @@ -36,4 +36,26 @@ >> #define MSM8996_VDDSSCX 5 >> #define MSM8996_VDDSSCX_VFC 6 >> +/* QCS404 Power Domains */ >> +#define QCS404_VDDMX 0 >> +#define QCS404_VDDMX_AO 1 >> +#define QCS404_VDDMX_VFL 2 >> +#define QCS404_LPICX 3 >> +#define QCS404_LPICX_VFL 4 >> +#define QCS404_LPIMX 5 >> +#define QCS404_LPIMX_VFL 6 >> + >> +/* RPM SMD Power Domain performance levels */ > > so unlike in the sdm845 case where we map these levels to > (contiguous) corners before passing it over to rpm, we seem > to pass these as-is to rpm, right? > > Does this work if the user passes some value which does not > really map to a level defined here? > For instance if value passed is 17 for instance do we fall back to > 16?
The rpm firmware will ensure that a ceil operation is performed on any requested level which does not map to a pre-defined level. I did try to do the same in kernel however since the opp-levels are not inserted in ascending order while populating the opp-table for rpmpd, it becomes difficult to get ceil/floor levels from the opp-table with minimal changes.
> >> +#define RPM_SMD_LEVEL_RETENTION 16 >> +#define RPM_SMD_LEVEL_RETENTION_PLUS 32 >> +#define RPM_SMD_LEVEL_MIN_SVS 48 >> +#define RPM_SMD_LEVEL_LOW_SVS 64 >> +#define RPM_SMD_LEVEL_SVS 128 >> +#define RPM_SMD_LEVEL_SVS_PLUS 192 >> +#define RPM_SMD_LEVEL_NOM 256 >> +#define RPM_SMD_LEVEL_NOM_PLUS 320 >> +#define RPM_SMD_LEVEL_TURBO 384 >> +#define RPM_SMD_LEVEL_TURBO_NO_CPR 416 >> +#define RPM_SMD_LEVEL_BINNING 512 >> + >> #endif >>
-- -- Sibi Sankar -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.
| |