linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] arm64: dts: qcom: Add Lenovo Yoga C630

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 4 Sep 2019 13:43:02 -0700
From:   Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
To:     Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>
Cc:     Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>, agross@...nel.org,
        robh+dt@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] arm64: dts: qcom: Add Lenovo Yoga C630

On Wed 04 Sep 04:52 PDT 2019, Vinod Koul wrote:

> On 04-09-19, 12:39, Lee Jones wrote:
> > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/Makefile
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/Makefile
> > @@ -12,5 +12,6 @@ dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_QCOM)	+= sdm845-cheza-r2.dtb
> >  dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_QCOM)	+= sdm845-cheza-r3.dtb
> >  dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_QCOM)	+= sdm845-db845c.dtb
> >  dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_QCOM)	+= sdm845-mtp.dtb
> > +dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_QCOM)	+= sdm850-lenovo-yoga-c630.dtb
> 
> Can we keep this sorted, so before mtp.
> 
> >  dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_QCOM)	+= qcs404-evb-1000.dtb
> >  dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_QCOM)	+= qcs404-evb-4000.dtb
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm850-lenovo-yoga-c630.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm850-lenovo-yoga-c630.dts
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..ad160c718b33
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm850-lenovo-yoga-c630.dts
> > @@ -0,0 +1,454 @@
> > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> 
> Are we going to make this dual? or BSD..
> 

Sounds good, Rob wants dual license so lets flag it as such.

> > +&apps_rsc {
> > +	pm8998-rpmh-regulators {
> > +		compatible = "qcom,pm8998-rpmh-regulators";
> > +		qcom,pmic-id = "a";
> > +
> > +		vdd-l2-l8-l17-supply = <&vreg_s3a_1p35>;
> > +		vdd-l7-l12-l14-l15-supply = <&vreg_s5a_2p04>;
> > +
> > +		vreg_s2a_1p125: smps2 {
> > +		};
> > +
> > +		vreg_s3a_1p35: smps3 {
> > +			regulator-min-microvolt = <1352000>;
> > +			regulator-max-microvolt = <1352000>;
> > +			regulator-initial-mode = <RPMH_REGULATOR_MODE_HPM>;
> > +		};
> > +
> > +		vreg_s4a_1p8: smps4 {
> > +			regulator-min-microvolt = <1800000>;
> > +			regulator-max-microvolt = <1800000>;
> > +			regulator-initial-mode = <RPMH_REGULATOR_MODE_HPM>;
> > +		};
> > +
> > +		vreg_s5a_2p04: smps5 {
> > +			regulator-min-microvolt = <2040000>;
> > +			regulator-max-microvolt = <2040000>;
> > +			regulator-initial-mode = <RPMH_REGULATOR_MODE_HPM>;
> > +		};
> > +
> > +		vreg_s7a_1p025: smps7 {
> 
> Any reason why we dont specify the mode and min/max voltage for this
> and few others below..?
> 

Iirc these values are not known from the tables provided by the
firmware. Label names are just "borrowed" from the MTP, so we can't
derive anything from there either.

I intended to review and clean this up before it was posted...

Regards,
Bjorn

> > +&i2c1 {
> > +	status = "okay";
> > +	clock-frequency = <400000>;
> > +	qcom,geni-se-fifo;
> > +
> > +	battery@70 {
> > +		compatible = "some,battery";
> 
> some,battery ..?
> 
> > +&qup_i2c12_default {
> 
> Please move the qup nodes up so that nodes are sorted alphabetically
> 
> -- 
> ~Vinod