Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: imx: Add cpufreq driver for imx7D/Solo SOC
From: Bai Ping
Date: Tue Nov 24 2015 - 02:50:58 EST
On 2015/11/23 17:40, Lucas Stach wrote:
Am Montag, den 23.11.2015, 22:07 +0800 schrieb Bai Ping:
The i.MX7Dual/Solo is a new series of the i.MX SOC family.
The existing cpufreq driver for 'i.MX6' or 'cpufreq-dt' can
NOT match the requirement of this new SOC. This patch adds the
cpufreq driver for i.MX7Dual/Solo.
So, what are those requirements, which could not be matched with
cpufreq-dt? We should really try to not add another cpufreq driver.
the requirement is the PLL1 used to source the CPU core clock can NOT
change frequency on the fly,
during the PLL1 frequency change, not clock output from this PLL1 in a
short time. this will lead to glitch
to the core clock. so before we change the PLL1's frequency, we must
switch the CPU core clock to another
clock source, after the PLL1 frequency has been changed, we switch back
core clock to PLL1.
I don't see anything special in here. A single regulator and some clocks
needing to be controlled in the right way. That's already handled for
i.MX5 with cpufreq-dt. Please look up how it is done there and try to do
it the same way for MX7, or provide substantial information why it
couldn't be done.
I have checked the i.MX5 cpufreq, As on i.MX5, no need to take care of
the PLL's frequency change flow,
so the cpufreq-dt is the best one to support cpufreq. But on i.MX7, the
PLL design is not the same as on i.MX5,
additional steps needed in CPU frequency changing flow. the issue that
can NOT be tackled by cpufreq-dt is
additional step used by PLL frequency change.
BR Jacky Bai
Regards,
Lucas
--
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/