Re: [PATCH 1/2] arm64: dts: rk3328: add gpu opp table
From: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
Date: 2021-10-18 18:09:40
Also in:
linux-arm-kernel, linux-rockchip, lkml
On 2021-10-17 16:29, Trevor Woerner wrote:
On Sat 2021-10-16 @ 10:45:04 PM, Johan Jonker wrote:quoted
On 10/16/21 5:45 PM, Trevor Woerner wrote:quoted
Add an operating-points table and cooling entry to the GPU on the RK3328 SoC to improve its performance. According to its datasheet[1] the maximum frequency of the Mali-450 MP2 GPU found on the RK3328 SoC is 500MHz. On my rock64 device, under x11, glmark2-es2 performance increased from around 60 to just over 100. Same device running glmark2-es2 under wayland/weston improved from just over 100 to just over 200. [1] https://rockchip.fr/RK3328%20datasheet%20V1.2.pdf Signed-off-by: Trevor Woerner <redacted> --- arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3328.dtsi | 26 +++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3328.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3328.dtsi index 8c821acb21ff..5e1dcf71e414 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3328.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3328.dtsi@@ -532,7 +532,8 @@ map0 { cooling-device = <&cpu0 THERMAL_NO_LIMIT THERMAL_NO_LIMIT>, <&cpu1 THERMAL_NO_LIMIT THERMAL_NO_LIMIT>, <&cpu2 THERMAL_NO_LIMIT THERMAL_NO_LIMIT>, - <&cpu3 THERMAL_NO_LIMIT THERMAL_NO_LIMIT>; + <&cpu3 THERMAL_NO_LIMIT THERMAL_NO_LIMIT>, + <&gpu THERMAL_NO_LIMIT THERMAL_NO_LIMIT>; contribution = <4096>; }; };@@ -617,6 +618,29 @@ gpu: gpu@ff300000 { clocks = <&cru ACLK_GPU>, <&cru ACLK_GPU>; clock-names = "bus", "core"; resets = <&cru SRST_GPU_A>; + operating-points-v2 = <&gpu_opp_table>; + #cooling-cells = <2>; + }; +quoted
+ gpu_opp_table: gpu-opp-table {After the conversion to YAML of the Operating Performance Points(OPP) binding the operating-points-v2 property expects the nodename to have the '^opp-table(-[a-z0-9]+)?$' format. make ARCH=arm64 dtbs_check DT_SCHEMA_FILES=Documentation/devicetree/bindings/opp/opp-v2.yamlThanks, I wasn't aware.quoted
quoted
+ compatible = "operating-points-v2"; + + opp-200000000 { + opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <200000000>; + opp-microvolt = <1100000>; + }; + opp-300000000 { + opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <300000000>; + opp-microvolt = <1100000>; + }; + opp-400000000 { + opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <400000000>; + opp-microvolt = <1100000>; + }; + opp-500000000 { + opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <500000000>; + opp-microvolt = <1100000>; + }; };opp-microvolt has the same value for every node vs. table below?On page 1 of the schematic for the rock64 https://files.pine64.org/doc/rock64/ROCK64_Schematic_v3.0_20181105.pdf is a table ("Power Timing") showing BUCK1 at 1.1V. I interpreted this to mean that VDD_LOG should always be at 1.1V, regardless of frequency.
No, that's just the default voltage that BUCK1 itself starts up at - looks like that table is an unfinished attempt to summarise the Power Sequence section from the RK805 datasheet.
quoted
See also previous discussion: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-rockchip/3c95c29b-6c07-5945-ac22-d683997e1ca0@arm.com/ (local) Is that now fixed/checked?I wasn't aware of the previous/on-going discussion regarding a gpu opp table for this SoC. Perhaps that explains my suspicions? I couldn't help wonder why the frequency is always reported as 163840000 even when I have an opp table that only has the 500MHz entry?
FWIW the usual culprit for clocks not changing is inadvertently not having devfreq and/or the simple_ondemand governor enabled. However, I do seem to recall that devfreq doesn't explicitly fix up an out-of-spec clock to a known OPP on startup like cpufreq does - I think it only actually touches the clocks and regulators when transitioning between OPPs, so if it only has one it might possibly end up in a pathological state where that effectively never happens; I don't remember exactly. Unfortunately all my boards are out of action for various reasons at the moment so I can't readily check how I was running mine, but from memory I think I ended up with slightly tweaked voltages based on a survey of several other BSP kernels, and the 200-300MHz points just disabled to avoid undervolting the memory controller once lima voltage scaling was working properly. Cheers, Robin.
I'll investigate whether I can prove or disprove the scaling is actually occurring? Best regards, Trevor