Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1241557 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: dts: sunxi: Add regulators for LeMaker BananaPi

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: dts: sunxi: Add regulators for LeMaker BananaPi Kevin Hilman <khilman@kernel.org> - 2015-10-07 16:40 +0200
    Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: dts: sunxi: Add regulators for LeMaker BananaPi "Timo Sigurdsson" <public_timo.s@silentcreek.de> - 2015-10-07 17:50 +0200
      Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: dts: sunxi: Add regulators for LeMaker BananaPi Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> - 2015-10-07 19:50 +0200
        Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: dts: sunxi: Add regulators for LeMaker BananaPi "Timo Sigurdsson" <public_timo.s@silentcreek.de> - 2015-10-07 20:00 +0200
      Re: [linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: dts: sunxi: Add regulators for  LeMaker BananaPi Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> - 2015-10-08 10:40 +0200

#1241557 — Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: dts: sunxi: Add regulators for LeMaker BananaPi

"Timo Sigurdsson" <public_timo.s@silentcreek.de> writes:

> Kevin Hilman schrieb am 24.09.2015 19:57:
>> kernelci.org started finding boot faiulres[1] on bananapi linux-next
>> around next-20150918, but it was only failing in some labs and not
>> others.  I finally bisected it down to this patch, which landed in
>> linux-next in the form of 2d665a8a8350 ARM: dts: sunxi: Add regulators
>> for LeMaker BananaPi.  Reverting that commit on top of next-20150923
>> gets my bananapi booting again.
>> 
>> Note it's kind of an interesting boot failure.  The kernel boots fully
>> to a shell, but panics after running a few commands.  In particular
>> 'dmesg -n1' seems to trigger it usually[2].
>> 
>> Kevin
>> 
>> [1]
>> http://kernelci.org/boot/sun7i-a20-bananapi/job/next/kernel/next-20150923/defconfig/multi_v7_defconfig/lab/lab-khilman/?_id=5602504359b514be146c326f
>> [2]
>> http://storage.kernelci.org/next/next-20150923/arm-multi_v7_defconfig/lab-khilman/boot-sun7i-a20-bananapi.html
>
> following up on my last email: I'm back from my vacation and I tried to
> reproduce your problem, but my board doesn't seem to be affected, so I
> cannot trigger it.
>
> I still think that the lower voltages may be the cause of your problem
> with that specific board, so could you please test the attached patch on
> top of my patch that you first experienced the problem with? Please let 
> us know whether this solves your issue or whether we need to dig deeper.

Thanks for the patch.  Looks like it's the OPPs.

I went back to next-20150923 and verified it still fails.  Then, I
applied your patch and saw that it boots just fine.

Kevin
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1241611

Hi Kevin,
Hi Maxime,

Kevin Hilman schrieb am 07.10.2015 16:36:

> "Timo Sigurdsson" <public_timo.s@silentcreek.de> writes:
>> I still think that the lower voltages may be the cause of your problem
>> with that specific board, so could you please test the attached patch on
>> top of my patch that you first experienced the problem with? Please let 
>> us know whether this solves your issue or whether we need to dig deeper.
> 
> Thanks for the patch.  Looks like it's the OPPs.
> 
> I went back to next-20150923 and verified it still fails.  Then, I
> applied your patch and saw that it boots just fine.

Good. Then we can easily fix this, I guess.

@Maxime: How should we handle this? In its current form, the patch applies
only to the BananaPi dts by overriding the inherited opp from the SoC dtsi.
In an earlier discussion, it was said that this can be done, even though it
might not be the most elegant approach. But then again, I think it
shouldn't be necessary to change the opp in the sun7i-a20.dtsi for all A20
boards since this is - to my knowledge - the first and only report that an
A20 board has stability issues at the lower voltages (although not too many
boards use voltage scaling yet). So, would you prefer to keep this as a
patch for BananaPi only, or change the dtsi for all A20 devices instead?

In case we keep it as it is, what is the correct commit to point to as
"Fixes commit ..."? I'd say it fixes the initial opp commit for A20, since
that's where these voltages were defined. But then again, if we don't
change the dtsi, should I point to my regulator patch instead?


Thanks and regards,

Timo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1241719

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hi Timo,

On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 05:49:18PM +0200, Timo Sigurdsson wrote:
> Hi Kevin,
> Hi Maxime,
> 
> Kevin Hilman schrieb am 07.10.2015 16:36:
> 
> > "Timo Sigurdsson" <public_timo.s@silentcreek.de> writes:
> >> I still think that the lower voltages may be the cause of your problem
> >> with that specific board, so could you please test the attached patch on
> >> top of my patch that you first experienced the problem with? Please let 
> >> us know whether this solves your issue or whether we need to dig deeper.
> > 
> > Thanks for the patch.  Looks like it's the OPPs.
> > 
> > I went back to next-20150923 and verified it still fails.  Then, I
> > applied your patch and saw that it boots just fine.
> 
> Good. Then we can easily fix this, I guess.
> 
> @Maxime: How should we handle this? In its current form, the patch applies
> only to the BananaPi dts by overriding the inherited opp from the SoC dtsi.
> In an earlier discussion, it was said that this can be done, even though it
> might not be the most elegant approach. But then again, I think it
> shouldn't be necessary to change the opp in the sun7i-a20.dtsi for all A20
> boards since this is - to my knowledge - the first and only report that an
> A20 board has stability issues at the lower voltages (although not too many
> boards use voltage scaling yet).

If you count only the number of boards, indeed, but if you count the
number of devices actually used in the field, we cover already a
significant portion of them.

> So, would you prefer to keep this as a patch for BananaPi only, or
> change the dtsi for all A20 devices instead?

Yeah, we probably can keep that for bananapi only at the moment, and
try to generalize that afterwards.

> In case we keep it as it is, what is the correct commit to point to as
> "Fixes commit ..."? I'd say it fixes the initial opp commit for A20, since
> that's where these voltages were defined. But then again, if we don't
> change the dtsi, should I point to my regulator patch instead?

I don't think it fixes anything at this point. We droped your commit
that was using the A20 OPPs, so in the history so far we don't have
anything to fix, just enable cpufreq again.

Maxime

-- 
Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1241720

Hi Maxime,

Maxime Ripard schrieb am 07.10.2015 19:49:

> Hi Timo,
> 
> On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 05:49:18PM +0200, Timo Sigurdsson wrote:
>> Hi Kevin,
>> Hi Maxime,
>> 
>> Kevin Hilman schrieb am 07.10.2015 16:36:
>> 
>> > "Timo Sigurdsson" <public_timo.s@silentcreek.de> writes:
>> >> I still think that the lower voltages may be the cause of your problem
>> >> with that specific board, so could you please test the attached patch on
>> >> top of my patch that you first experienced the problem with? Please let 
>> >> us know whether this solves your issue or whether we need to dig deeper.
>> > 
>> > Thanks for the patch.  Looks like it's the OPPs.
>> > 
>> > I went back to next-20150923 and verified it still fails.  Then, I
>> > applied your patch and saw that it boots just fine.
>> 
>> Good. Then we can easily fix this, I guess.
>> 
>> @Maxime: How should we handle this? In its current form, the patch applies
>> only to the BananaPi dts by overriding the inherited opp from the SoC dtsi.
>> In an earlier discussion, it was said that this can be done, even though it
>> might not be the most elegant approach. But then again, I think it
>> shouldn't be necessary to change the opp in the sun7i-a20.dtsi for all A20
>> boards since this is - to my knowledge - the first and only report that an
>> A20 board has stability issues at the lower voltages (although not too many
>> boards use voltage scaling yet).
> 
> If you count only the number of boards, indeed, but if you count the
> number of devices actually used in the field, we cover already a
> significant portion of them.
> 
>> So, would you prefer to keep this as a patch for BananaPi only, or
>> change the dtsi for all A20 devices instead?
> 
> Yeah, we probably can keep that for bananapi only at the moment, and
> try to generalize that afterwards.

Ok.

> 
>> In case we keep it as it is, what is the correct commit to point to as
>> "Fixes commit ..."? I'd say it fixes the initial opp commit for A20, since
>> that's where these voltages were defined. But then again, if we don't
>> change the dtsi, should I point to my regulator patch instead?
> 
> I don't think it fixes anything at this point. We droped your commit
> that was using the A20 OPPs, so in the history so far we don't have
> anything to fix, just enable cpufreq again.

Ok. I'll send a third version of the regulator patch then with the
updated opp included.

Thanks,

Timo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1242064 — Re: [linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: dts: sunxi: Add regulators for LeMaker BananaPi

Hi,

On 10/07/2015 05:01 PM, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>> @Maxime: How should we handle this? In its current form, the patch applies
>> only to the BananaPi dts by overriding the inherited opp from the SoC dtsi.
>> In an earlier discussion, it was said that this can be done, even though it
>> might not be the most elegant approach. But then again, I think it
>> shouldn't be necessary to change the opp in the sun7i-a20.dtsi for all A20
>> boards since this is - to my knowledge - the first and only report that an
>> A20 board has stability issues at the lower voltages (although not too many
>> boards use voltage scaling yet).
>
> IIUC this setting doesn't affect signals external to the A20, so it
> seems like it should be board-agnostic.

This setting configures the voltage at the pmic output pin, not at the SoC
power-input pins. And how much of the voltage actually makes it from the pmic
to the SoC definitely is board-specific. So we are going to need board-specific
opp-s in some cases (like this one for example).

Regards,

Hans
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web