On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 10:25 PM, Chander Kashyap <k.chan...@samsung.com> wrote: > Hi Kevin, > > On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 9:02 PM, Kevin Hilman <khil...@linaro.org> wrote: >> Hi Chander, >> >> Chander Kashyap <k.chan...@samsung.com> writes: >> >> [...] >> >>>>> I'm trying it on the 5800/Chromebook2 and it's not terribly stable. I'm >>>>> testing along with CPUidle, so there may be some untested interactions >>>>> there as it seems a bit more stable without CPUidle enabled. >>>>> >>>>> I'd love to hear from anyone else that's testing CPUidle and CPUfreq >>>>> together big.LITTLE 5420/5800, with or without the switcher. >>> >>> I have tested this patch series on SMDK5420 with cpuidle (with and >>> without b.L switcher enabled). >>> >>> As of now voltage scaling support is not there in generic big-little >>> cpufreq driver (arm_big_little.c). >>> Hence need to tie arm and kfc voltages to highest level for testing. >> >>> Without this change stability issues are there, but with this change >>> everything is stable. >> >> Can you clarify how you're setting the voltages to ensure stability? > > below is the diff : wip/exynos/integ
Thanks. I've applied your patch, and bootup shows vdd_arm and vdd_kfc at 1500mV, but still when booting with cpuidle enabled (bL switcher disabled), I'm seeing lockups with no kernel output. With CPUidle disabled, things are pretty stable. What tree are you using to test this out on 5420? I'm using mainline v3.17-rc1 + DT patch for CPUidle and this cpufreq series. See my wip/exynos/integ branch at git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/khilman/linux.git. Are there other out of tree dependencies that I'm missing? Is the max77802 regulator support that's in mainline sufficient? or am I missing some stuff there? Kevin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
