[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4a5c27922a9852c06e1832dcc63b4a448e8955e5.camel@linaro.org>
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2024 08:34:16 +0000
From: André Draszik <andre.draszik@...aro.org>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>, Catalin Marinas
<catalin.marinas@....com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Greg
Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley
<conor+dt@...nel.org>, Jagan Sridharan <badhri@...gle.com>, Alim Akhtar
<alim.akhtar@...sung.com>
Cc: Peter Griffin <peter.griffin@...aro.org>, Tudor Ambarus
<tudor.ambarus@...aro.org>, Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@...aro.org>,
Will McVicker <willmcvicker@...gle.com>, Roy Luo <royluo@...gle.com>,
kernel-team@...roid.com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] arm64: dts: exynos: gs101-oriole: add pd-disable
and typec-power-opmode
On Thu, 2024-11-28 at 09:21 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 27/11/2024 12:01, André Draszik wrote:
> > When the serial console is enabled, we need to disable power delivery
> > since serial uses the SBU1/2 pins and appears to confuse the TCPCI,
> > resulting in endless interrupts.
> >
> > For now, change the DT such that the serial console continues working.
> >
> > Note1: We can not have both typec-power-opmode and
> > new-source-frs-typec-current active at the same time, as otherwise DT
> > binding checks complain.
> >
> > Note2: When using a downstream DT, the Pixel boot-loader will modify
> > the DT accordingly before boot, but for this upstream DT it doesn't
> > know where to find the TCPCI node. The intention is for this commit to
> > be reverted once an updated Pixel boot-loader becomes available.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: André Draszik <andre.draszik@...aro.org>
>
> This should be squashed to the previous patch, including also combining
> commit messages.
I contemplated that, but I didn't in the end so that it's easy to just
revert this specific patch once the boot loader is updated.
I would prefer to keep them as separate patches for that reason, but will
squash if you still think that's better.
Cheers,
Andre'
Powered by blists - more mailing lists