| Message ID | 20240704191919.38856-1-didi.debian@cknow.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | arm64: dts: rockchip: Add avdd supplies to hdmi on rock64 | expand |
Hello Diederik, Please see some comments below. On 2024-07-04 21:18, Diederik de Haas wrote: > Pine64's Rock64 was missing the avdd supply properties on the hdmi > node, > causing the following warnings: > > dwhdmi-rockchip ff3c0000.hdmi: supply avdd-0v9 not found, using > dummy regulator > dwhdmi-rockchip ff3c0000.hdmi: supply avdd-1v8 not found, using > dummy regulator > > In the Rock64 Schematic document version 2.0 those supplies are marked > as DVIDEO_AVDD_1V0 and DVIDEO_AVDD_1V8 respectively, but in version 3.0 > those are named HDMI_AVDD_1V0 and HDMI_AVDD_1V8, which is a bit > clearer. > In both versions those are connected to LDO3 and LDO1 respectively. > > While the DeviceTree property is named 'avdd-0v9-supply' the > 'rockchip,dw-hdmi.yaml' binding document notes the following: > > A 0.9V supply that powers up the SoC internal circuitry. The actual > pin name varies between the different SoCs and is usually > HDMI_TX_AVDD_0V9 or sometimes HDMI_AVDD_1V0. > > So the 'vdd_10' reference is not an error. > > Signed-off-by: Diederik de Haas <didi.debian@cknow.org> Already verified the above-quoted statement from the .yaml binding in the RK3328 and RK3399 datasheets. Thus, hoping that you agree with the first line: Helped-by: Dragan Simic <dsimic@manjaro.org> Reviewed-by: Dragan Simic <dsimic@manjaro.org> I'd also suggest that a brief comment is added to rk3328-rock64.dts, right above the "avdd-0v9-supply = <&vdd_10>;" line. Perhaps something like this: > + /* > + * RK3328 requires 1.0 V on HDMI_AVDD_1V0, which is HDMI_AVDD_0V9 > + * and requires 0.9 V on other Rockchip SoCs > + */ > --- > arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3328-rock64.dts | 2 ++ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3328-rock64.dts > b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3328-rock64.dts > index 229fe9da9c2d..90fef766f3ae 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3328-rock64.dts > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3328-rock64.dts > @@ -154,6 +154,8 @@ &gmac2io { > }; > > &hdmi { > + avdd-0v9-supply = <&vdd_10>; > + avdd-1v8-supply = <&vcc_18>; > status = "okay"; > };
Hi Dragan, On Sunday, 7 July 2024 23:23:30 CEST Dragan Simic wrote: > On 2024-07-04 21:18, Diederik de Haas wrote: > > Pine64's Rock64 was missing the avdd supply properties on the hdmi > > node, > > > > causing the following warnings: > > dwhdmi-rockchip ff3c0000.hdmi: supply avdd-0v9 not found, using > > dummy regulator > > > > dwhdmi-rockchip ff3c0000.hdmi: supply avdd-1v8 not found, using > > dummy regulator > > > > In the Rock64 Schematic document version 2.0 those supplies are marked > > as DVIDEO_AVDD_1V0 and DVIDEO_AVDD_1V8 respectively, but in version 3.0 > > those are named HDMI_AVDD_1V0 and HDMI_AVDD_1V8, which is a bit > > clearer. > > In both versions those are connected to LDO3 and LDO1 respectively. > > > > While the DeviceTree property is named 'avdd-0v9-supply' the > > > > 'rockchip,dw-hdmi.yaml' binding document notes the following: > > A 0.9V supply that powers up the SoC internal circuitry. The actual > > pin name varies between the different SoCs and is usually > > HDMI_TX_AVDD_0V9 or sometimes HDMI_AVDD_1V0. > > > > So the 'vdd_10' reference is not an error. > > > > Signed-off-by: Diederik de Haas <didi.debian@cknow.org> > > Already verified the above-quoted statement from the .yaml binding > in the RK3328 and RK3399 datasheets. Thus, hoping that you agree > with the first line: > > Helped-by: Dragan Simic <dsimic@manjaro.org> While you helped me in several areas (understanding 'things') and I think proper attribution is very important, in this case it would be incorrect IMO. I was helped by Heiko's (big) hint in their counter-proposal (which does deserve a Helped-by tag), from that point on, it was all my own work. After Heiko's counter-proposal I had found the regulator I needed to reference. I then resolved the DVIDEO vs HDMI remark by looking at v2 and v3 of the Schematic document. Which left 1 thing to resolve ... On Thursday, 4 July 2024 12:34:18 CEST Diederik de Haas wrote: > I do wonder about 0.9V vs 1.0V, but I'll bug someone else about that ;-) I did mean you with that, but in the end I did resolve it myself. I found the 'note' in the binding document and when I then found "min: 0.9; typical: 1.0; max: 1.1" in para 3.2 (page 36) of the RK3328 Datasheet, I felt I had resolved that issue sufficiently as well and was confident enough to sent the patch out (without sending you a RFC patch first). > Reviewed-by: Dragan Simic <dsimic@manjaro.org> Thanks :-) > I'd also suggest that a brief comment is added to rk3328-rock64.dts, > right above the "avdd-0v9-supply = <&vdd_10>;" line. Perhaps something > > like this: > > + /* > > + * RK3328 requires 1.0 V on HDMI_AVDD_1V0, which is HDMI_AVDD_0V9 > > + * and requires 0.9 V on other Rockchip SoCs > > + */ The binding doc mention this: "The actual pin name varies between the different SoCs and is *usually* HDMI_TX_AVDD_0V9" (emphasis mine) So that comment would make stronger claims then is present in the binding document and also uses a different pin name. I also don't think it's useful to mention what other SoCs (or boards) use in the rk3328-rock64.dts. While I fully agree that the apparent discrepancy should be documented, I choose to do that in the commit message and I don't see a value to repeat that in the dts file itself. When I see something which looks 'odd', I'd then use `git blame` to find the commit which set that and then I'd see the commit message which explains it. Cheers, Diederik > > --- > > > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3328-rock64.dts | 2 ++ > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3328-rock64.dts > > b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3328-rock64.dts > > index 229fe9da9c2d..90fef766f3ae 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3328-rock64.dts > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3328-rock64.dts > > @@ -154,6 +154,8 @@ &gmac2io { > > > > }; > > > > &hdmi { > > > > + avdd-0v9-supply = <&vdd_10>; > > + avdd-1v8-supply = <&vcc_18>; > > > > status = "okay"; > > > > };
On Thu, 4 Jul 2024 21:18:33 +0200, Diederik de Haas wrote: > Pine64's Rock64 was missing the avdd supply properties on the hdmi node, > causing the following warnings: > > dwhdmi-rockchip ff3c0000.hdmi: supply avdd-0v9 not found, using dummy regulator > dwhdmi-rockchip ff3c0000.hdmi: supply avdd-1v8 not found, using dummy regulator > > In the Rock64 Schematic document version 2.0 those supplies are marked > as DVIDEO_AVDD_1V0 and DVIDEO_AVDD_1V8 respectively, but in version 3.0 > those are named HDMI_AVDD_1V0 and HDMI_AVDD_1V8, which is a bit clearer. > In both versions those are connected to LDO3 and LDO1 respectively. > > [...] Applied, thanks! [1/1] arm64: dts: rockchip: Add avdd supplies to hdmi on rock64 commit: dbdadc14b94e1c0326a430c1f84592a9b5c6b6d2 Added the Reviewed-by tag, but not the 2nd. Best regards,
Hello Diederik, On 2024-07-08 11:55, Diederik de Haas wrote: > On Sunday, 7 July 2024 23:23:30 CEST Dragan Simic wrote: >> On 2024-07-04 21:18, Diederik de Haas wrote: >> > Pine64's Rock64 was missing the avdd supply properties on the hdmi >> > node, >> > >> > causing the following warnings: >> > dwhdmi-rockchip ff3c0000.hdmi: supply avdd-0v9 not found, using >> > dummy regulator >> > >> > dwhdmi-rockchip ff3c0000.hdmi: supply avdd-1v8 not found, using >> > dummy regulator >> > >> > In the Rock64 Schematic document version 2.0 those supplies are marked >> > as DVIDEO_AVDD_1V0 and DVIDEO_AVDD_1V8 respectively, but in version 3.0 >> > those are named HDMI_AVDD_1V0 and HDMI_AVDD_1V8, which is a bit >> > clearer. >> > In both versions those are connected to LDO3 and LDO1 respectively. >> > >> > While the DeviceTree property is named 'avdd-0v9-supply' the >> > >> > 'rockchip,dw-hdmi.yaml' binding document notes the following: >> > A 0.9V supply that powers up the SoC internal circuitry. The actual >> > pin name varies between the different SoCs and is usually >> > HDMI_TX_AVDD_0V9 or sometimes HDMI_AVDD_1V0. >> > >> > So the 'vdd_10' reference is not an error. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Diederik de Haas <didi.debian@cknow.org> >> >> Already verified the above-quoted statement from the .yaml binding >> in the RK3328 and RK3399 datasheets. Thus, hoping that you agree >> with the first line: >> >> Helped-by: Dragan Simic <dsimic@manjaro.org> > > While you helped me in several areas (understanding 'things') and I > think > proper attribution is very important, in this case it would be > incorrect IMO. > I was helped by Heiko's (big) hint in their counter-proposal (which > does > deserve a Helped-by tag), from that point on, it was all my own work. > > After Heiko's counter-proposal I had found the regulator I needed to > reference. I then resolved the DVIDEO vs HDMI remark by looking at v2 > and v3 > of the Schematic document. Which left 1 thing to resolve ... > > On Thursday, 4 July 2024 12:34:18 CEST Diederik de Haas wrote: >> I do wonder about 0.9V vs 1.0V, but I'll bug someone else about that >> ;-) > > I did mean you with that, but in the end I did resolve it myself. > I found the 'note' in the binding document and when I then found "min: > 0.9; > typical: 1.0; max: 1.1" in para 3.2 (page 36) of the RK3328 Datasheet, > I felt > I had resolved that issue sufficiently as well and was confident enough > to sent > the patch out (without sending you a RFC patch first). > >> Reviewed-by: Dragan Simic <dsimic@manjaro.org> > > Thanks :-) > >> I'd also suggest that a brief comment is added to rk3328-rock64.dts, >> right above the "avdd-0v9-supply = <&vdd_10>;" line. Perhaps >> something >> >> like this: >> > + /* >> > + * RK3328 requires 1.0 V on HDMI_AVDD_1V0, which is HDMI_AVDD_0V9 >> > + * and requires 0.9 V on other Rockchip SoCs >> > + */ > > The binding doc mention this: "The actual pin name varies between the > different > SoCs and is *usually* HDMI_TX_AVDD_0V9" (emphasis mine) > > So that comment would make stronger claims then is present in the > binding > document and also uses a different pin name. I also don't think it's > useful to > mention what other SoCs (or boards) use in the rk3328-rock64.dts. > > While I fully agree that the apparent discrepancy should be documented, > I > choose to do that in the commit message and I don't see a value to > repeat that > in the dts file itself. > When I see something which looks 'odd', I'd then use `git blame` to > find the > commit which set that and then I'd see the commit message which > explains it. Just for the record, I'm fine with your decisions. >> > --- >> > >> > arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3328-rock64.dts | 2 ++ >> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) >> > >> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3328-rock64.dts >> > b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3328-rock64.dts >> > index 229fe9da9c2d..90fef766f3ae 100644 >> > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3328-rock64.dts >> > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3328-rock64.dts >> > @@ -154,6 +154,8 @@ &gmac2io { >> > >> > }; >> > >> > &hdmi { >> > >> > + avdd-0v9-supply = <&vdd_10>; >> > + avdd-1v8-supply = <&vcc_18>; >> > >> > status = "okay"; >> > >> > }; > > > _______________________________________________ > Linux-rockchip mailing list > Linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip
diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3328-rock64.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3328-rock64.dts index 229fe9da9c2d..90fef766f3ae 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3328-rock64.dts +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3328-rock64.dts @@ -154,6 +154,8 @@ &gmac2io { }; &hdmi { + avdd-0v9-supply = <&vdd_10>; + avdd-1v8-supply = <&vcc_18>; status = "okay"; };
Pine64's Rock64 was missing the avdd supply properties on the hdmi node, causing the following warnings: dwhdmi-rockchip ff3c0000.hdmi: supply avdd-0v9 not found, using dummy regulator dwhdmi-rockchip ff3c0000.hdmi: supply avdd-1v8 not found, using dummy regulator In the Rock64 Schematic document version 2.0 those supplies are marked as DVIDEO_AVDD_1V0 and DVIDEO_AVDD_1V8 respectively, but in version 3.0 those are named HDMI_AVDD_1V0 and HDMI_AVDD_1V8, which is a bit clearer. In both versions those are connected to LDO3 and LDO1 respectively. While the DeviceTree property is named 'avdd-0v9-supply' the 'rockchip,dw-hdmi.yaml' binding document notes the following: A 0.9V supply that powers up the SoC internal circuitry. The actual pin name varies between the different SoCs and is usually HDMI_TX_AVDD_0V9 or sometimes HDMI_AVDD_1V0. So the 'vdd_10' reference is not an error. Signed-off-by: Diederik de Haas <didi.debian@cknow.org> --- arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3328-rock64.dts | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)