From: Andrej Picej <andrej.picej@norik.com> To: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org> Cc: haibo.chen@nxp.com, linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, lars@metafoo.de, shawnguo@kernel.org, s.hauer@pengutronix.de, kernel@pengutronix.de, festevam@gmail.com, imx@lists.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, robh@kernel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org, conor+dt@kernel.org, upstream@lists.phytec.de Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] i.MX93 ADC calibration settings Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2024 09:32:35 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <3423ea96-859d-4c4b-a9a7-e0d9c3c00727@norik.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20240324135559.1640551d@jic23-huawei> Hi Jonathan, On 24. 03. 24 14:55, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 11:04:04 +0100 > Andrej Picej <andrej.picej@norik.com> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> we had some problems with failing ADC calibration on the i.MX93 boards. >> Changing default calibration settings fixed this. The board where this >> patches are useful is not yet upstream but will be soon (hopefully). > > Tell us more. My initial instinct is that this shouldn't be board specific. > What's the trade off we are making here? Time vs precision of calibration or > something else? If these are set to a level by default that doesn't work > for our board, maybe we should just change them for all devices? > So we have two different boards with the same SoC. On one, the calibration works with the default values, on the second one the calibration fails, which makes the ADC unusable. What the ADC lines measure differ between the boards though. But the implementation is nothing out of the ordinary. We tried different things but the only thing that helped is to use different calibration properties. We tried deferring the probe and calibration until later boot and after boot, but it did not help. In the Reference Manual [1] (chapter 72.5.1) it is written: > 4. Configure desired calibration settings (default values kept for highest accuracy maximum time). So your assumption is correct, longer calibration time (more averaging samples) -> higher precision. The default values go for a high accuracy. And since we use a NRSMPL (Number of Averaging Samples) of 32 instead of default 512, we reduce the accuracy so the calibration values pass the internal defined limits. I'm not sure that changing default values is the right solution here. We saw default values work with one of the boards. And since the NXP kept these values adjustable I think there is a reason behind it. Note: When I say one of the boards I mean one board form. So same board version, but different HW. Best regards, Andrej [1] i.MX 93 Applications Processor Reference Manual, Rev. 4, 12/2023 _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Andrej Picej <andrej.picej@norik.com> To: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org> Cc: haibo.chen@nxp.com, linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, lars@metafoo.de, shawnguo@kernel.org, s.hauer@pengutronix.de, kernel@pengutronix.de, festevam@gmail.com, imx@lists.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, robh@kernel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org, conor+dt@kernel.org, upstream@lists.phytec.de Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] i.MX93 ADC calibration settings Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2024 09:32:35 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <3423ea96-859d-4c4b-a9a7-e0d9c3c00727@norik.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20240324135559.1640551d@jic23-huawei> Hi Jonathan, On 24. 03. 24 14:55, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 11:04:04 +0100 > Andrej Picej <andrej.picej@norik.com> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> we had some problems with failing ADC calibration on the i.MX93 boards. >> Changing default calibration settings fixed this. The board where this >> patches are useful is not yet upstream but will be soon (hopefully). > > Tell us more. My initial instinct is that this shouldn't be board specific. > What's the trade off we are making here? Time vs precision of calibration or > something else? If these are set to a level by default that doesn't work > for our board, maybe we should just change them for all devices? > So we have two different boards with the same SoC. On one, the calibration works with the default values, on the second one the calibration fails, which makes the ADC unusable. What the ADC lines measure differ between the boards though. But the implementation is nothing out of the ordinary. We tried different things but the only thing that helped is to use different calibration properties. We tried deferring the probe and calibration until later boot and after boot, but it did not help. In the Reference Manual [1] (chapter 72.5.1) it is written: > 4. Configure desired calibration settings (default values kept for highest accuracy maximum time). So your assumption is correct, longer calibration time (more averaging samples) -> higher precision. The default values go for a high accuracy. And since we use a NRSMPL (Number of Averaging Samples) of 32 instead of default 512, we reduce the accuracy so the calibration values pass the internal defined limits. I'm not sure that changing default values is the right solution here. We saw default values work with one of the boards. And since the NXP kept these values adjustable I think there is a reason behind it. Note: When I say one of the boards I mean one board form. So same board version, but different HW. Best regards, Andrej [1] i.MX 93 Applications Processor Reference Manual, Rev. 4, 12/2023
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-25 8:32 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2024-03-20 10:04 [PATCH 0/2] i.MX93 ADC calibration settings Andrej Picej 2024-03-20 10:04 ` Andrej Picej 2024-03-20 10:04 ` [PATCH 1/2] iio: adc: imx93: Make calibration properties configurable Andrej Picej 2024-03-20 10:04 ` Andrej Picej 2024-03-24 14:02 ` Jonathan Cameron 2024-03-24 14:02 ` Jonathan Cameron 2024-03-20 10:04 ` [PATCH 2/2] dt-bindings: iio: adc: nxp,imx93-adc.yaml: Add calibration properties Andrej Picej 2024-03-20 10:04 ` Andrej Picej 2024-03-20 10:26 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2024-03-20 10:26 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2024-03-20 12:05 ` Andrej Picej 2024-03-20 12:05 ` Andrej Picej 2024-03-20 12:15 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2024-03-20 12:15 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2024-03-22 7:39 ` Andrej Picej 2024-03-22 7:39 ` Andrej Picej 2024-03-22 8:14 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2024-03-22 8:14 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2024-03-22 9:58 ` Andrej Picej 2024-03-22 9:58 ` Andrej Picej 2024-03-24 13:54 ` Jonathan Cameron 2024-03-24 13:54 ` Jonathan Cameron 2024-03-25 9:58 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2024-03-25 9:58 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski 2024-03-25 14:38 ` Jonathan Cameron 2024-03-25 14:38 ` Jonathan Cameron 2024-03-20 21:41 ` Rob Herring 2024-03-20 21:41 ` Rob Herring 2024-03-22 6:47 ` kernel test robot 2024-03-22 6:47 ` kernel test robot 2024-03-24 13:55 ` [PATCH 0/2] i.MX93 ADC calibration settings Jonathan Cameron 2024-03-24 13:55 ` Jonathan Cameron 2024-03-25 8:32 ` Andrej Picej [this message] 2024-03-25 8:32 ` Andrej Picej 2024-03-25 8:55 ` [Upstream] " Primoz Fiser 2024-03-25 8:55 ` Primoz Fiser 2024-03-25 14:45 ` Jonathan Cameron 2024-03-25 14:45 ` Jonathan Cameron 2024-03-29 7:58 ` Primoz Fiser 2024-03-29 7:58 ` Primoz Fiser
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=3423ea96-859d-4c4b-a9a7-e0d9c3c00727@norik.com \ --to=andrej.picej@norik.com \ --cc=conor+dt@kernel.org \ --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=festevam@gmail.com \ --cc=haibo.chen@nxp.com \ --cc=imx@lists.linux.dev \ --cc=jic23@kernel.org \ --cc=kernel@pengutronix.de \ --cc=krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org \ --cc=lars@metafoo.de \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=robh@kernel.org \ --cc=s.hauer@pengutronix.de \ --cc=shawnguo@kernel.org \ --cc=upstream@lists.phytec.de \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.