[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c9f8ae74-5d25-4d26-82f3-6a6c8331df2a@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2024 09:34:54 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: André Draszik <andre.draszik@...aro.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 28/11/2024 09:34, André Draszik wrote:
> 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.
>
OK, can be separate.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists