[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <D6GG70FQ29ZB.PEJZ4TE4HWQV@fairphone.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2024 11:15:47 +0100
From: "Luca Weiss" <luca.weiss@...rphone.com>
To: "Konrad Dybcio" <konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com>, "Bjorn Andersson"
<andersson@...nel.org>, "Konrad Dybcio" <konradybcio@...nel.org>, "Dmitry
Baryshkov" <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
Cc: <~postmarketos/upstreaming@...ts.sr.ht>, <phone-devel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] soc: qcom: pd_mapper: Add SM7225 compatible
On Fri Dec 20, 2024 at 10:39 AM CET, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> On 20.12.2024 9:39 AM, Luca Weiss wrote:
> > The Qualcomm SM7225 is practically identical to SM6350, so add an entry
> > using that data.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Luca Weiss <luca.weiss@...rphone.com>
> > ---
>
> I think we should instead add the fallback compatible, like
>
> - enum:
> - asdf,asdf
> - const: qcom,sm7225
> - const: qcom,sm6350
>
> as we've done for speedbin/rename variants of SoCs lately, with separate
> entries being added for "actually different" sillicon.
We also have currently for example sm7325=sc7280=qcm6490, would that
fall into this category as well for you, or are they more different?
But do you think it's worth trying to also change existing platforms
like that? We also have basically the same list in
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq-dt-platdev.c where we have both sm6350 and
sm7225 right now.
Regards
Luca
>
> Konrad
Powered by blists - more mailing lists