On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 05:57:22PM +0200, Enric Balletbo Serra wrote: > Hi Tom, > > 2013/7/23 Dan Murphy <dmur...@ti.com>: > > On 07/19/2013 02:00 PM, Tom Rini wrote: > >> Add a am33xx_spl_board_init (and enable the PMICs) that we may see, > >> depending on the board we are running on. In all cases, we see if we > >> can rely on the efuse_sma register to tell us the maximum speed. In the > >> case of Beaglebone White, we need to make sure we are on AC power, and > >> are on later than rev A1, and then we can ramp up to the PG1.0 maximum > >> of 720Mhz. In the case of Beaglebone Black, we are either on PG2.0 that > >> supports 1GHz or PG2.1. As PG2.0 may or may not have efuse_sma set, we > >> cannot rely on this probe. In the case of the GP EVM, EVM SK and IDK we > >> need to rely on the efuse_sma if we are on PG2.1, and the defaults for > >> PG1.0/2.0. [snip] > >> + /* > >> + * The GP EVM, IDK and EVM SK use a TPS65910 PMIC. For all > >> + * MPU frequencies we support we use a CORE voltage of > >> + * 1.1375V. For MPU voltage we need to switch based on > >> + * the frequency we are running at. > >> + */ > >> + if (i2c_probe(TPS65910_CTRL_I2C_ADDR)) > >> + return; > >> + > >> + /* VDD1/2 voltage selection register access by control i/f */ > >> + if (i2c_read(TPS65910_CTRL_I2C_ADDR, TPS65910_DEVCTRL_REG, 1, > >> + buf, 1)) > > > > Would it not be better to have an API in the pmic driver file that > > you can call to access the pmic instead of calling the pmic > > explicitly?
So, somewhat.
[snip]
> >> + /* Depending on MPU clock we need different MPU VDD */
> >> +
> >> + /* Default to PG1.0/PG2.0 values. */
> >> + mpu_vdd = TPS65910_OP_REG_SEL_1_1_3;
> >> +
> >> + if (sil_rev >= 2) {
> >> + switch (mpu_pll) {
> >> + case MPUPLL_M_1000:
> >> + mpu_vdd = TPS65910_OP_REG_SEL_1_3_2_5;
> >> + break;
> >> + case MPUPLL_M_800:
> >> + mpu_vdd = TPS65910_OP_REG_SEL_1_2_6;
> >> + break;
> >> + case MPUPLL_M_720:
> >> + mpu_vdd = TPS65910_OP_REG_SEL_1_2_0;
> >> + break;
> >> + case MPUPLL_M_600:
> >> + case MPUPLL_M_300:
> >> + mpu_vdd = TPS65910_OP_REG_SEL_1_1_3;
> >> + break;
> >> + }
> >> + }
[snip]
> As example, I just pushed[1] in my personal git an implementation of
> am33xx_spl_board_init for IGEP COM AQUILA AM335x based on your
> patches. As you can see this function is very similar to the function
> implemented in your patch. I wonder if it's possible implement a more
> generic form in order to avoid repeating code in board files. Maybe
> something like this :
>
> For am335x_evm :
>
> am33xx_spl_board_init {
> /* Get MPU max frequency */
> mpu_pll = am335x_get_efuse_mpu_max_freq()
> if (board_is_bone() || board_is_bone_lt())
> tps65217_set_mpu_voltagel(mpu_pll) /* not sure if this can be generic
> */
> else
> tp65910_set_mpu_voltagel(mpu_pll)
The problem is that the TPS65910 family supports a wide range of non-TI
platforms (s5p, rockchip rk29xx, i.mx) so we can't hide the PG A.B ->
voltage required bit in the tps65910 call. I'll see how something looks
in arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/sys_info.c along with the
efuse_mpu_max_freq function.
--
Tom
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
