[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ddd0f518-f9e1-49e8-bbaf-b810adcd35b3@linaro.org>
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2025 08:07:22 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@....qualcomm.com>
Cc: Rob Clark <robin.clark@....qualcomm.com>,
Dmitry Baryshkov <lumag@...nel.org>, Abhinav Kumar
<abhinav.kumar@...ux.dev>, Jessica Zhang <jessica.zhang@....qualcomm.com>,
Sean Paul <sean@...rly.run>, Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@...ainline.org>,
David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>, Simona Vetter <simona@...ll.ch>,
Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Kuogee Hsieh <quic_khsieh@...cinc.com>,
Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@...aro.org>, Mahadevan <quic_mahap@...cinc.com>,
Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, freedreno@...ts.freedesktop.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 8/9] arm64: dts: qcom: sm6350: correct DP compatibility
strings
On 02/09/2025 06:04, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6350.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6350.dtsi
>>> index 2493b9611dcb675f4c33794ecc0ee9e8823e24d4..8459b27cacc72a4827a2e289e669163ad6250059 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6350.dtsi
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6350.dtsi
>>> @@ -2249,7 +2249,7 @@ opp-560000000 {
>>> };
>>>
>>> mdss_dp: displayport-controller@...0000 {
>>> - compatible = "qcom,sm6350-dp", "qcom,sm8350-dp";
>>> + compatible = "qcom,sm6350-dp", "qcom,sc7180-dp";
>>
>> No, that's breaking all the users.
>
> WHy though? Both old and new lines are using fallbacks to bind the
> driver to the device.
Kernel has sc7180 fallback, but what if other DTS user does not and that
other user was relying on sm8350 fallback compatible? That other user
won't have sm6350 dedicated handling as well.
That breaking of users I meant.
With the kernel it should work, assuming SC7180-dp was introduced
similar time as 8350-dp.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists