Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] arm64: dts: qcom: Add display support for QCS615 RIDE board

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Aug 28, 2025 at 10:57:41AM +0800, Fange Zhang wrote:
> 
> 
> On 8/28/2025 4:01 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 27, 2025 at 09:08:39PM +0800, Fange Zhang wrote:
> > > From: Li Liu <li.liu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > 
> > > Add display MDSS and DSI configuration for QCS615 RIDE board.
> > > QCS615 has a DP port, and DP support will be added in a later patch.
> > > 
> > > Reviewed-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Li Liu <li.liu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Fange Zhang <fange.zhang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >   arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcs615-ride.dts | 150 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >   1 file changed, 150 insertions(+)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcs615-ride.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcs615-ride.dts
> > > index e663343df75d59481786192cde647017a83c4191..f6e0c82cf85459d8989332497ded8b6ea3670c76 100644
> > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcs615-ride.dts
> > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcs615-ride.dts
> > > @@ -39,6 +39,76 @@ xo_board_clk: xo-board-clk {
> > >   		};
> > >   	};
> > > +	dp-dsi0-connector {
> > > +		compatible = "dp-connector";
> > > +		label = "DSI0";
> > > +		type = "mini";
> > > +
> > > +		port {
> > > +			dp_dsi0_connector_in: endpoint {
> > > +				remote-endpoint = <&dsi2dp_bridge_out>;
> > > +			};
> > > +		};
> > > +	};
> > > +
> > > +	vreg_12p0: vreg-12p0-regulator {
> > 
> > I should be more carefull when doing reviews. I thought that it was
> > pointed out already and didn't some of the obvious things...
> > 
> > First of all, the nodes are sorted. By the name, not by the label.
> > Second, there are already regulators in this file. Why are the new nodes
> > not following the existing pattern and why are they not placed at a
> > proper place?
> 
> Initially, we referred to https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-arm-msm/patch/20250604071851.1438612-3-quic_amakhija@xxxxxxxxxxx/
> as a reference, but its node ordering seems a bit unconventional.
> 
> Would this revised ordering be acceptable?
> 
> ...
> + dp-dsi0-connector
> 
> vreg_conn_1p8: regulator-conn-1p8
> vreg_conn_pa: regulator-conn-pa
> regulator-usb2-vbus

So... Existing regulator nodes have the name of 'regulator-foo-bar'.

> 
> + vreg_12p0: vreg-12p0-regulator
> + vreg_1p0: vreg-1p0-regulator
> + vreg_1p8: vreg-1p8-regulator
> + vreg_3p0: vreg-3p0-regulator
> + vreg_5p0: vreg-5p0-regulator

While yours use 'vreg-baz-regulator'. Why? Don't blindly c&p data from
other platforms.

> wcn6855-pmu
> ...
> 
> > 
> > 
> > [.... skipped all defined regulators ...]
> > 
> > > +	};
> > > +
> > >   	vreg_conn_1p8: regulator-conn-1p8 {
> > 
> > Tadam! It's even a part of the patch.
> > 
> > >   		compatible = "regulator-fixed";
> > >   		regulator-name = "vreg_conn_1p8";
> > 
> 

-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry




[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [Linux for Sparc]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux