arm64: dts: rockchip: Add avdd supplies to hdmi on rock64

[PATCH] arm64: dts: rockchip: Add avdd supplies to hdmi on rock64

Posted by Diederik de Haas 1 year, 7 months ago

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(+)

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";
 };
 
-- 
2.45.2

Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: rockchip: Add avdd supplies to hdmi on rock64

Posted by Heiko Stuebner 1 year, 7 months ago

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,
-- 
Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>

Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: rockchip: Add avdd supplies to hdmi on rock64

Posted by Dragan Simic 1 year, 7 months ago

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";
>  };

Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: rockchip: Add avdd supplies to hdmi on rock64

Posted by Diederik de Haas 1 year, 7 months ago

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";
> >  
> >  };

Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: rockchip: Add avdd supplies to hdmi on rock64

Posted by Dragan Simic 1 year, 7 months ago

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