On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 14:34, Tom Rini trini@ti.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 11:19 AM, Menon, Nishanth nm@ti.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 11:04, Tom Rini trini@ti.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 01, 2012 at 08:08:30PM +0530, R Sricharan wrote:
The nominal opp vdd values as recommended for ES1.0 silicon is set for mpu, core, mm domains using palmas.
OK, this creates some trivial conflicts with http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/144137/ but also raises a functional problem / question. Is this patch also changing the order to match what Nishanth did or does this patch also need that functional change done (and a v3) ? Thanks!
Glancing at this patch, I see that scale sequence is still mpu, core, MM - which is what my sequence fixes. will be nice to have the sequence fixed followed by cleanup/update to retain the sequence appropriately.
- /* Palmas settings */
- volt = VDD_MPU;
- do_scale_vcore(SMPS_REG_ADDR_12_MPU, volt);
- /* VCORE 1 - for vdd_core */
- volt = 1000;
- do_scale_vcore(SMPS_REG_ADDR_VCORE1, volt);
- volt = VDD_MM;
- do_scale_vcore(SMPS_REG_ADDR_45_IVA, volt);
- /* VCORE 2 - for vdd_MM */
- volt = 1125;
- do_scale_vcore(SMPS_REG_ADDR_VCORE2, volt);
- volt = VDD_CORE;
- do_scale_vcore(SMPS_REG_ADDR_8_CORE, volt);
I think what might be easiest all around is to drop Nishanth's 4/4 and have patch 5 here correct the order as well, crediting Nishanth for the fix. Alternatively, respin the series, depending on Nishanth's series being applied. Thanks.
ok with either. might be good to merge my patch 5 here so that #patches are reduced :)
Regards, Nishanth Menon