linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] arm64: dts: qcom: Add X1E78100 ThinkPad T14s Gen 6

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: <atjcj5qnetxilrnoom7xisqbl5yhq5ktg3jb7dfnkdnzbqblb5@qbkqupznvrua>
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2024 13:55:20 -0500
From: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>
To: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
Cc: Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>, Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@...aro.org>, 
	Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, 
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, 
	Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@...ainline.org>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] arm64: dts: qcom: Add X1E78100 ThinkPad T14s Gen 6

On Mon, Jul 22, 2024 at 07:03:43PM GMT, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 22, 2024 at 08:00:19AM GMT, Rob Clark wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 22, 2024 at 3:11 AM Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@...aro.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 24-07-22 10:42:57, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> > > > On 21.07.2024 6:40 PM, Abel Vesa wrote:
> > > > > On 24-07-19 22:16:38, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> > > > >> Add support for the aforementioned laptop. That includes:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> - input methods, incl. lid switch (keyboard needs the pdc
> > > > >>   wakeup-parent removal hack..)
> > > > >> - NVMe, WiFi
> > > > >> - USB-C ports
> > > > >> - GPU, display
> > > > >> - DSPs
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Notably, the USB-A ports on the side are depenedent on the USB
> > > > >> multiport controller making it upstream.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> At least one of the eDP panels used (non-touchscreen) identifies as
> > > > >> BOE 0x0b66.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> See below for the hardware description from the OEM.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Link: https://www.lenovo.com/us/en/p/laptops/thinkpad/thinkpadt/lenovo-thinkpad-t14s-gen-6-(14-inch-snapdragon)/len101t0099
> > > > >> Signed-off-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
> > > > >
> > > > > Few comments below. Otherwise, LGTM.
> > > > >
> > > > > Reviewed-by: Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@...aro.org>
> > > > >
> > > > >> ---
> > > > >>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/Makefile                  |   1 +
> > > > >>  .../dts/qcom/x1e78100-lenovo-thinkpad-t14s.dts     | 792 +++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > >>  2 files changed, 793 insertions(+)
> > > > >>
> > > > >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/Makefile b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/Makefile
> > > > >> index 0e5c810304fb..734a05e04c4a 100644
> > > > >> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/Makefile
> > > > >> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/Makefile
> > > > >> @@ -261,6 +261,7 @@ dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_QCOM)        += sm8650-hdk-display-card.dtb
> > > > >>  dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_QCOM)   += sm8650-hdk.dtb
> > > > >>  dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_QCOM)   += sm8650-mtp.dtb
> > > > >>  dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_QCOM)   += sm8650-qrd.dtb
> > > > >> +dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_QCOM)   += x1e78100-lenovo-thinkpad-t14s.dtb
> > > > >>  dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_QCOM)   += x1e80100-asus-vivobook-s15.dtb
> > > > >>  dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_QCOM)   += x1e80100-crd.dtb
> > > > >>  dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_QCOM)   += x1e80100-lenovo-yoga-slim7x.dtb
> > > > >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/x1e78100-lenovo-thinkpad-t14s.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/x1e78100-lenovo-thinkpad-t14s.dts
> > > > >
> > > > > So what happens for SKUs of this model wil have x1e80100 ?
> > > > >
> > > > > Maybe we should stick to x1e80100 ?
> > > >
> > > > This one only ships with 78100
> > > >
> > >
> > > Sure, but then in upstream we only have 80100. Plus, it is included in
> > > this file as well.
> > >
> > > I don't know what's the right thing to do here. But I think it keeps
> > > things more simple if we keep everything under the x1e80100 umbrella.
> > 
> > plus sticking to x1e80100 will avoid angering tab completion :-P
> 
> This is an old argument, with no clear answer. For some devices we
> choose to use correct SoC name (sda660-inforce-ifc6560). For other we
> didn't (sdm845-db845c, which really is SDA845). However for most of the
> devices the goal is to be accurate (think about all the qcs vs qcm
> stories). So my 2c. would go to x1e78100.
> 

I agree, x1e78100 follows the naming scheme we have agreed upon - for
better or worse.

Regards,
Bjorn

> -- 
> With best wishes
> Dmitry