Re: [PATCH 0/3] drm/gk20a: support for reclocking
From: Alexandre Courbot
Date: Sun Jul 13 2014 - 22:14:20 EST
On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 7:54 PM, Peter De Schrijver
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 03:49:06AM +0200, Alex Courbot wrote:
>> On 07/10/2014 06:43 PM, Peter De Schrijver wrote:
>> > On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 09:34:34AM +0200, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
>> >> This series adds support for reclocking on GK20A. The first two patches touch
>> >> the clock subsystem to allow GK20A to operate, by making the presence of the
>> >> thermal and voltage devices optional, and allowing pstates to be provided
>> >> directly instead of being probed using the BIOS (which Tegra does not have).
>> >> The last patch adds the GK20A clock device. Arguably the clock can be seen as a
>> >> stripped-down version of what is seen on NVE0, however instead of using NVE0
>> >> support has been written from scratch using the ChromeOS kernel as a basis.
>> >> There are several reasons for this:
>> >> - The ChromeOS driver uses a lookup table for the P coefficient which I could
>> >> not find in the NVE0 driver,
>> >> - Some registers that NVE0 expects to find are not present on GK20A (e.g.
>> >> 0x137120 and 0x137140),
>> >> - Calculation of MNP is done differently from what is performed in
>> >> nva3_pll_calc(), and it might be interesting to compare the two methods,
>> >> - All the same, the programming sequence is done differently in the ChromeOS
>> >> driver and NVE0 could possibly benefit from it (?)
>> >> It would be interesting to try and merge both, but for now I prefer to have the
>> >> two coexisting to ensure proper operation on GK20A and besure I don't break
>> >> dGPU support. :)
>> >> Regarding the first patch, one might argue that I could as well add thermal
>> >> and voltage devices to GK20A. The reason this is not done is because these
>> >> currently depend heavily on the presence of a BIOS, and will require a rework
>> >> similar to that done in patch 2 for clocks. I would like to make sure this
>> >> approach is approved because applying it to other subdevs.
>> > I think this should use CCF so we can use pre and post rate change notifiers
>> > to hookup vdd_gpu DVS.
>> Do you mean that we should turn the Nouveau gk20a clock driver into a
>> consumer of this CCF clock? I have nothing against this, but note that
>> Nouveau can also perform DVS on its own, as the pstates can also contain
>> a voltage to be applied to the volt device (not yet implemented in this
> Yes. For Tegra I think it makes sense to move DVS out of the individual
> drivers. Then we can share the code which has to deal with building the OPP
> tables with other DVS rails (eg. vdd_core) for example. Often there are also
> chip specific quirks to be dealt with (such as the maximum allowed voltage step
> or voltage relationships between rails), which are easier to handle in common
I see, thanks for the explanation. It should be relatively easy to
convert the clock to CCF if/when we need it - for now I will keep the
direct Nouveau implementation for simplicity purposes.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/