On Mon, 22 Dec 2025 at 09:19, Akhil P Oommen <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 12/13/2025 12:58 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 12, 2025 at 01:01:44AM +0530, Akhil P Oommen wrote: > >> On 12/11/2025 6:56 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > >>> On Thu, Dec 11, 2025 at 05:22:40PM +0530, Akhil P Oommen wrote: > >>>> On 12/11/2025 4:42 PM, Akhil P Oommen wrote: > >>>>> On 12/11/2025 6:06 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > >>>>>> On Thu, Dec 11, 2025 at 02:40:52AM +0530, Akhil P Oommen wrote: > >>>>>>> On 12/6/2025 2:04 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > >>>>>>>> On Fri, Dec 05, 2025 at 03:59:09PM +0530, Akhil P Oommen wrote: > >>>>>>>>> On 12/4/2025 7:49 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Dec 04, 2025 at 03:43:33PM +0530, Akhil P Oommen wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> On 11/26/2025 6:12 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Nov 22, 2025 at 03:03:10PM +0100, Konrad Dybcio wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/21/25 10:52 PM, Akhil P Oommen wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: Jie Zhang <[email protected]> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Add gpu and rgmu nodes for qcs615 chipset. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jie Zhang <[email protected]> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Akhil P Oommen <[email protected]> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> --- > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> [...] > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> + gpu_opp_table: opp-table { > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> + compatible = > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "operating-points-v2"; > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> + > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> + opp-845000000 { > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> + opp-hz = /bits/ 64 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <845000000>; > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> + required-opps = > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <&rpmhpd_opp_turbo>; > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> + opp-peak-kBps = > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <7050000>; > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> + }; > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> I see another speed of 895 @ turbo_l1, perhaps that's for > >>>>>>>>>>>>> speedbins > >>>>>>>>>>>>> or mobile parts specifically? > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> msm-4.14 defines 7 speedbins for SM6150. Akhil, I don't see any > >>>>>>>>>>>> of them > >>>>>>>>>>>> here. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> The IoT/Auto variants have a different frequency plan compared to > >>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>> mobile variant. I reviewed the downstream code and this aligns > >>>>>>>>>>> with that > >>>>>>>>>>> except the 290Mhz corner. We can remove that one. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Here we are describing the IoT variant of Talos. So we can ignore > >>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>> speedbins from the mobile variant until that is supported. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> No, we are describing just Talos, which hopefully covers both > >>>>>>>>>> mobile and > >>>>>>>>>> non-mobile platforms. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> We cannot assume that. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Even if we assume that there is no variation in silicon, the > >>>>>>>>> firmware > >>>>>>>>> (AOP, TZ, HYP etc) is different between mobile and IoT version. So > >>>>>>>>> it is > >>>>>>>>> wise to use the configuration that is commercialized, especially > >>>>>>>>> when it > >>>>>>>>> is power related. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> How does it affect the speed bins? I'd really prefer if we: > >>>>>>>> - describe OPP tables and speed bins here > >>>>>>>> - remove speed bins cell for the Auto / IoT boards > >>>>>>>> - make sure that the driver uses the IoT bin if there is no speed bin > >>>>>>>> declared in the GPU. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> The frequency plan is different between mobile and IoT. Are you > >>>>>>> proposing to describe a union of OPP table from both mobile and IoT? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Okay, this prompted me to check the sa6155p.dtsi from msm-4.14... And > >>>>>> it > >>>>>> has speed bins. How comes we don't have bins for the IoT variant? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Mobile bins: 0, 177, 187, 156, 136, 105, 73 > >>>>>> Auto bins: 0, 177, 156, 136, 105, 73 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Both Mobile and Auto chips used the same NVMEM cell (0x6004, 8 bits > >>>>>> starting from bit 21). > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Mobile freqs: > >>>>>> 0: 845M, 745M, 700M, 550M, 435M, 290M > >>>>>> 177: 845M, 745M, 700M, 550M, 435M, 290M > >>>>>> 187: 895M, 845M, 745M, 700M, 550M, 435M, 290M > >>>>>> 156: 745M, 700M, 550M, 435M, 290M > >>>>>> 136: 650M, 550M, 435M, 290M > >>>>>> 105: 500M, 435M, 290M > >>>>>> 73: 350M, 290M > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Auto freqs: > >>>>>> 0: 845M, 745M, 650M, 500M, 435M > >>>>>> 177: 845M, 745M, 650M, 500M, 435M > >>>>>> 156: 745M, 650M, 500M, 435M > >>>>>> 136: 650M, 500M, 435M > >>>>>> 105: 500M, 435M > >>>>>> 73: 350M > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 290M was a part of the freq table, but later it was removed as "not > >>>>>> required", so probably it can be brought back, but I'm not sure how to > >>>>>> handle 650 MHz vs 700 MHz and 500 MHz vs 550 MHz differences. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I'm a bit persistent here because I really want to avoid the situation > >>>>>> where we define a bin-less OPP table and later we face binned QCS615 > >>>>>> chips (which is possible since both SM and SA were binned). > >>>>> > >>>>> Why is that a problem as long as KMD can handle it without breaking > >>>>> backward compatibility? > >>>> > >>>> I replied too soon. I see your point. Can't we keep separate OPP tables > >>>> when that happen? That is neat-er than complicating the driver, isn't it? > >>> > >>> I have different story in mind. We ship DTB for IQ-615 listing 845 MHz > >>> as a max freq without speed bins. Later some of the chips shipped in > >>> IQ-615 are characterized as not belonging to bin 0 / not supporting 845 > >>> MHz. The users end up overclocking those chips, because the DTB doesn't > >>> make any difference. > >> > >> That is unlikely, because the characterization and other similiar > >> activities are completed and finalized before ramp up at foundries. > >> Nobody likes to RMA tons of chipsets. > >> > >> Anyway, this hypothetical scenarios is a problem even when we use the > >> hard fuse. > > > > So, are you promising that while there were several characterization > > bins for SM6150 and SA6155P, there is only one bin for QCS615, going up > > to the max freq? > > I have cross checked with our Product team. I can confirm that for both > internal and external SKUs of Talos IoT currently, there is only a > single bin for GPU with Fmax 845Mhz.
Okay. Thanks for the confirmation. What happens when somebody starts working on a phone using SM6150 SoC (e.g. Xiaomi Redmi Note 7 Pro)? Likewise, If I understand correctly, QCS615 RIDE aka ADP Air uses an auto SKU rather than the IoT one (please correct me if I'm wrong here). > > > > >> > >>> > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Also I don't see separate QFPROM memory map definitions for Mobile, IoT > >>>>>> and Auto SKUs. If you have access to the QCS615 hardware, what is the > >>>>>> value written in that fuse area? > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Another wrinkle we need to address is that, so far, we have never had > >>>>>>> a > >>>>>>> dt binding where opp-supp-hw property exist without the speedbin > >>>>>>> cells. > >>>>>>> And that adds a bit of complexity on the driver side because, today, > >>>>>>> the > >>>>>>> KMD relies on the presence of speed bin cells to decide whether to > >>>>>>> select bin via opp_supp_hw API or not. Also, we may have to reserve > >>>>>>> this > >>>>>>> combination (opp bins without speedbin cells) to help KMD detect that > >>>>>>> it > >>>>>>> should use socinfo APIs instead of speedbin cells on certain > >>>>>>> chipsets.\ > >>>> > >>>>> If it is a soft fuse, it could fall into an unused region in qfprom. On > >>>>> other IoT chipsets like Lemans, Product teams preferred a soft fuse > >>>>> instead of the hard fuse. The downside of the hard fuse that it should > >>>>> be blown from factory and not flexible to update from software later in > >>>>> the program. > >>>> > >>>> This response is for your comment above. Adding to that, the value for > >>>> the hard fuse is mostly likely to be '0' (unfused), but all internal > >>>> parts are always unfused. Maybe it is 'practically' harmless to use the > >>>> freq-limiter hard fuse for now, because 845Mhz is the Fmax for '0' on > >>>> mobile, Auto and IoT. I am not sure. > >>>> > >>>> I am trying to play safe here as this is dt. We don't want to configure > >>>> the wrong thing now and later struggle to correct it. It is safe to > >>>> defer things which we don't know. > >>> > >>> What is "soft fuse"? Why do we need an extra entity in addition to the > >>> one that was defined for auto / mobile units? > >> > >> The hard fuse (freq limiter one) has to be blown at a very early stage > >> in the chip manufacturing. Instead of that, a soft fuse region which is > >> updated by the firmware during the cold boot is used to provide a hint > >> to KMD about the supported GPU fmax. I was told that this provides > >> better operational flexibility to the Product team. > > > > Do you have an upstream example by chance? > > We use soft fuse for Lemans IoT. > > -Akhil. > > > > >> > >> -Akhil > >> > >>> > >>>> > >>>> -Akhil. > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -Akhil. > >>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> We already have "machine" as another axis in the GPU catalog. I'd > >>>>>> suggest defining separate speed bins for mobile and auto/IoT in the DT > >>>>>> (0x1 - 0x20 for mobile, 0x100 - 0x1000 for auto) and then in the driver > >>>>>> mapping those by the machine compat. > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> > > > -- With best wishes Dmitry
