linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: qcom: qcm6490-idp: add display and panel

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]

Message-ID: <20a8efd1-e243-434e-8f75-aa786ac8014f@linaro.org>
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2024 13:06:26 +0100
From: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
To: Ritesh Kumar <quic_riteshk@...cinc.com>, andersson@...nel.org,
 robh+dt@...nel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, conor+dt@...nel.org,
 catalin.marinas@....com, will@...nel.org, quic_bjorande@...cinc.com,
 geert+renesas@...der.be, arnd@...db.de, neil.armstrong@...aro.org,
 dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org, nfraprado@...labora.com,
 m.szyprowski@...sung.com
Cc: linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
 quic_abhinavk@...cinc.com, quic_rajeevny@...cinc.com,
 quic_vproddut@...cinc.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: qcom: qcm6490-idp: add display and panel



On 1/16/24 10:49, Ritesh Kumar wrote:
> Enable Display Subsystem with Novatek NT36672E Panel
> on qcm6490 idp platform.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ritesh Kumar <quic_riteshk@...cinc.com>
> ---
>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcm6490-idp.dts | 100 +++++++++++++++++++++++
>   1 file changed, 100 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcm6490-idp.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcm6490-idp.dts
> index 2a6e4907c5ee..efa5252130a1 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcm6490-idp.dts
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcm6490-idp.dts
> @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@
>   #define PM7250B_SID 8
>   #define PM7250B_SID1 9
>   
> +#include <dt-bindings/pinctrl/qcom,pmic-gpio.h>
>   #include <dt-bindings/regulator/qcom,rpmh-regulator.h>
>   #include "sc7280.dtsi"
>   #include "pm7250b.dtsi"
> @@ -38,6 +39,25 @@
>   		stdout-path = "serial0:115200n8";
>   	};
>   
> +	lcd_disp_bias: lcd-disp-bias-regulator {
> +		compatible = "regulator-fixed";
> +		regulator-name = "lcd_disp_bias";
> +		regulator-min-microvolt = <5500000>;
> +		regulator-max-microvolt = <5500000>;
> +		gpio = <&pm7250b_gpios 2 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>;
> +		enable-active-high;
> +		pinctrl-names = "default";
> +		pinctrl-0 = <&lcd_disp_bias_en>;

property-n
property-names

all throughout the patch

> +&gpu {
> +	status = "disabled";
> +};

Hm.. generally we disable the GPU in the SoC DT, but that doesn't
seem to have happened here..

Thinking about it more, is disabling it here necessary? Does it
not fail gracefully?

Konrad