On Thu, Aug 28, 2025 at 01:12:14PM +0800, Fange Zhang wrote:
>
>
> On 8/28/2025 12:41 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> > 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.
>
> Got it, The revised format will be:
>
> + vreg_12p0: regulator-vreg-12p0
> + vreg_1p0: regulator-vreg-1p0
> + vreg_1p8: regulator-vreg-1p8
> + vreg_3p0: regulator-vreg-3p0
> + vreg_5p0: regulator-vreg-5p0
>
> Let me know if you have any further suggestions.
What's the name of power rail in the schematics? vreg-Np0?
--
With best wishes
Dmitry
