From: Alexander Stein <alexander.stein@ew.tq-group.com>
To: Jacky Bai <ping.bai@nxp.com>,
"lgirdwood@gmail.com" <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
"broonie@kernel.org" <broonie@kernel.org>,
"robh+dt@kernel.org" <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
"krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org"
<krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
"conor+dt@kernel.org" <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
"shawnguo@kernel.org" <shawnguo@kernel.org>,
"s.hauer@pengutronix.de" <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, Joy Zou <joy.zou@nxp.com>
Cc: "kernel@pengutronix.de" <kernel@pengutronix.de>,
"festevam@gmail.com" <festevam@gmail.com>,
dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@nxp.com>,
"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] regulator: pca9450: add pca9451a support
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2023 16:02:09 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2213718.72vocr9iq0@steina-w> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AM6PR04MB59255766CED30160FB552F94E10AA@AM6PR04MB5925.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Hi,
Am Dienstag, 1. August 2023, 12:17:20 CEST schrieb Joy Zou:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Alexander Stein
> > <alexander.stein@ew.tq-group.com<mailto:alexander.stein@ew.tq-group.com>>
> >
Sent: 2023年7月5日 21:13
> > To: Jacky Bai <ping.bai@nxp.com<mailto:ping.bai@nxp.com>>;
> > lgirdwood@gmail.com<mailto:lgirdwood@gmail.com>;
> > broonie@kernel.org<mailto:broonie@kernel.org>;
> > robh+dt@kernel.org<mailto:robh+dt@kernel.org>;
> > krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org<mailto:krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.or
> > g>; conor+dt@kernel.org<mailto:conor+dt@kernel.org>;
> > shawnguo@kernel.org<mailto:shawnguo@kernel.org>;
> > s.hauer@pengutronix.de<mailto:s.hauer@pengutronix.de>;
> > linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org<mailto:linux-arm-kernel@lists.infrad
> > ead.org>; Joy Zou <joy.zou@nxp.com<mailto:joy.zou@nxp.com>> Cc:
> > kernel@pengutronix.de<mailto:kernel@pengutronix.de>;
> > festevam@gmail.com<mailto:festevam@gmail.com>; dl-linux-imx
> > <linux-imx@nxp.com<mailto:linux-imx@nxp.com>>;
> > devicetree@vger.kernel.org<mailto:devicetree@vger.kernel.org>;
> > linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org<mailto:linux-arm-kernel@lists.infrad
> > ead.org>;
> > linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org<mailto:linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
> > Subject: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] regulator: pca9450: add pca9451a
> > support>
> >
> >
> > Caution: This is an external email. Please take care when clicking links
> > or
opening attachments. When in doubt, report the message using the
> > 'Report this email' button
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> >
> >
> > Am Mittwoch, 5. Juli 2023, 08:50:24 CEST schrieb Joy Zou:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Alexander Stein
> > > > <alexander.stein@ew.tq-group.com<mailto:alexander.stein@ew.tq-group.c
> > > > om>>
Sent: 2023年5月31日 19:35
> > > > To: Jacky Bai <ping.bai@nxp.com<mailto:ping.bai@nxp.com>>;
> > > > lgirdwood@gmail.com<mailto:lgirdwood@gmail.com>;
> > > > broonie@kernel.org<mailto:broonie@kernel.org>;
> > > > robh+dt@kernel.org<mailto:robh+dt@kernel.org>;
> > > > krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org<mailto:krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linar
> > > > o.org>; conor+dt@kernel.org<mailto:conor+dt@kernel.org>;
> > > > shawnguo@kernel.org<mailto:shawnguo@kernel.org>;
> > > > s.hauer@pengutronix.de<mailto:s.hauer@pengutronix.de>;
> > > > linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org<mailto:linux-arm-kernel@lists.in
> > > > fradead.org> Cc: kernel@pengutronix.de<mailto:kernel@pengutronix.de>;
> > > > festevam@gmail.com<mailto:festevam@gmail.com>; dl-linux-imx
> > > > <linux-imx@nxp.com<mailto:linux-imx@nxp.com>>;
> > > > devicetree@vger.kernel.org<mailto:devicetree@vger.kernel.org>;
> > > > linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org<mailto:linux-arm-kernel@lists.in
> > > > fradead.org>;
> > > > linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org<mailto:linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>;
> > > > Joy Zou
> >
> > <joy.zou@nxp.com<mailto:joy.zou@nxp.com>>
> >
> > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] regulator: pca9450: add pca9451a
> > > > support
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > > @@ -104,7 +104,15 @@ static const struct regulator_ops
> > > > > pca9450_ldo_regulator_ops = { * 0.60 to 2.1875V (12.5mV step)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > */
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > static const struct linear_range pca9450_dvs_buck_volts[] = {
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > - REGULATOR_LINEAR_RANGE(600000, 0x00, 0x7F, 12500),
> > > > > + REGULATOR_LINEAR_RANGE(600000, 0x00, 0x7F, 12500), };
> > > > > +
> > > > > +/*
> > > > > + * BUCK1/3
> > > > > + * 0.65 to 2.2375V (12.5mV step)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Reading this comment, it seems the same distinction needs to be done
> > > > for
> > > > BUCK3 as well, no?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Sorry for the late reply!
> > > The BUCK1 and BUCK3 are dual phase, so don't need to be done for BUCK3.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > + */
> > > > > +static const struct linear_range pca9450_trim_dvs_buck_volts[] = {
> > > > > + REGULATOR_LINEAR_RANGE(650000, 0x00, 0x7F, 12500),
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > };
>
>
>
> > > > > @@ -708,8 +917,9 @@ static int pca9450_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client
> > > > > *i2c)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > const struct pca9450_regulator_desc *regulator_desc;
> > > > > struct regulator_config config = { };
> > > > > struct pca9450 *pca9450;
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > - unsigned int device_id, i;
> > > > > + unsigned int device_id, i, val;
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > unsigned int reset_ctrl;
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > + bool pmic_trim = false;
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > int ret;
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > if (!i2c->irq) {
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > @@ -721,6 +931,22 @@ static int pca9450_i2c_probe(struct
> > > > > i2c_client
> > > > > *i2c)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > if (!pca9450)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > return -ENOMEM;
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > + pca9450->regmap = devm_regmap_init_i2c(i2c,
> > > > > +
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > &pca9450_regmap_config);
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > + if (IS_ERR(pca9450->regmap)) {
> > > > > + dev_err(&i2c->dev, "regmap initialization failed\n");
> > > > > + return PTR_ERR(pca9450->regmap);
> > > > > + }
> > > > > +
> > > > > + ret = regmap_read(pca9450->regmap, PCA9450_REG_PWRCTRL,
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > &val);
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > + if (ret) {
> > > > > + dev_err(&i2c->dev, "Read device id error\n");
> > > > > + return ret;
> > > > > + }
> > > > > +
> > > > > + if (val & PCA9450_REG_PWRCTRL_TOFF_DEB)
> > > > > + pmic_trim = true;
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > PCA9450_REG_PWRCTRL is a read/write register. How is it possible to
> > > > detect a chip revision using a bit which can be changed by software
> > > > e.g.
> > > > bootloader? Despite that this bit sets debounce time for
> > > > PMIC_ON_REQ, how is this related to BUCK1 voltage range?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > There are old and new two kind PMIC pca9451a.
> >
> >
> >
> > There is only one part mentioned in the ordering options. How can I
> > distinguish them? Any chip ID, date codes, markings?
>
> Yes, there is only one part. We distinguish the new and old part by this
> bit
Toff_Deb of PCA9450_REG_PWRCTRL reset value. The reset value 0 means
> it's old part, and the reset value 1 means it's new part.
Is the "old" part by coincidence an unofficial prerelease/sample chip?
> >
> >
> > > This bit sets debounce time in
> > > PCA9450_REG_PWRCTRL was set different value by hardware in order to
> > > only distinguish the old and new PMIC. This bit isn't related to the
> > > BUCK1 voltage range. If the pmic_trim is true that means it's new
> > > pca9451a.
>
> >
> >
> > But this bit is writable. How do you know it has not been modified since
> > reset?
> Yes, we don't consider modify the debounce bit case. Modify the Toff_deb
> value
will influence the old and new part judgement.
This judgement seems broken to me. How can I know offline whether I have old
or new parts? I would like to know if there is a difference on some my boards.
> For example, this default value of Toff_deb is 1 in the new part, if the
> customers
change the Toff_deb value from 1 to 0, and then make the board
> warm reset, the Toff_deb value still keep 0, if the Toff_deb value is 0,
> the PMIC driver will think this part is old part. But this part is new part
> in fact.
This should show you it's a bad idea to decide the chip revision depending on
Toff_deb.
> Have discussed this issue with our internal team member, we will add a note
> to PCA9451
datasheet – “Please contract NXP If you want to change
> Toff_deb.” But till now, we am not aware any customers case which need to
> adjust Toff_deb.
>
> Make it more clear: If customers do need to manually adjust Toff_deb, It
> need PMIC driver
update to bypass this bit check and directly apply
> corresponding voltage config table old or new. Thank you very much for your
> comments and efforts.
In this case I need to know if I use old, new or both revision of these parts.
Best regards,
Alexander
--
TQ-Systems GmbH | Mühlstraße 2, Gut Delling | 82229 Seefeld, Germany
Amtsgericht München, HRB 105018
Geschäftsführer: Detlef Schneider, Rüdiger Stahl, Stefan Schneider
http://www.tq-group.com/
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Alexander Stein <alexander.stein@ew.tq-group.com>
To: Jacky Bai <ping.bai@nxp.com>,
"lgirdwood@gmail.com" <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
"broonie@kernel.org" <broonie@kernel.org>,
"robh+dt@kernel.org" <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
"krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org"
<krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
"conor+dt@kernel.org" <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
"shawnguo@kernel.org" <shawnguo@kernel.org>,
"s.hauer@pengutronix.de" <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, Joy Zou <joy.zou@nxp.com>
Cc: "kernel@pengutronix.de" <kernel@pengutronix.de>,
"festevam@gmail.com" <festevam@gmail.com>,
dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@nxp.com>,
"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] regulator: pca9450: add pca9451a support
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2023 16:02:09 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2213718.72vocr9iq0@steina-w> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AM6PR04MB59255766CED30160FB552F94E10AA@AM6PR04MB5925.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Hi,
Am Dienstag, 1. August 2023, 12:17:20 CEST schrieb Joy Zou:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Alexander Stein
> > <alexander.stein@ew.tq-group.com<mailto:alexander.stein@ew.tq-group.com>>
> >
Sent: 2023年7月5日 21:13
> > To: Jacky Bai <ping.bai@nxp.com<mailto:ping.bai@nxp.com>>;
> > lgirdwood@gmail.com<mailto:lgirdwood@gmail.com>;
> > broonie@kernel.org<mailto:broonie@kernel.org>;
> > robh+dt@kernel.org<mailto:robh+dt@kernel.org>;
> > krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org<mailto:krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.or
> > g>; conor+dt@kernel.org<mailto:conor+dt@kernel.org>;
> > shawnguo@kernel.org<mailto:shawnguo@kernel.org>;
> > s.hauer@pengutronix.de<mailto:s.hauer@pengutronix.de>;
> > linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org<mailto:linux-arm-kernel@lists.infrad
> > ead.org>; Joy Zou <joy.zou@nxp.com<mailto:joy.zou@nxp.com>> Cc:
> > kernel@pengutronix.de<mailto:kernel@pengutronix.de>;
> > festevam@gmail.com<mailto:festevam@gmail.com>; dl-linux-imx
> > <linux-imx@nxp.com<mailto:linux-imx@nxp.com>>;
> > devicetree@vger.kernel.org<mailto:devicetree@vger.kernel.org>;
> > linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org<mailto:linux-arm-kernel@lists.infrad
> > ead.org>;
> > linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org<mailto:linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
> > Subject: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] regulator: pca9450: add pca9451a
> > support>
> >
> >
> > Caution: This is an external email. Please take care when clicking links
> > or
opening attachments. When in doubt, report the message using the
> > 'Report this email' button
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> >
> >
> > Am Mittwoch, 5. Juli 2023, 08:50:24 CEST schrieb Joy Zou:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Alexander Stein
> > > > <alexander.stein@ew.tq-group.com<mailto:alexander.stein@ew.tq-group.c
> > > > om>>
Sent: 2023年5月31日 19:35
> > > > To: Jacky Bai <ping.bai@nxp.com<mailto:ping.bai@nxp.com>>;
> > > > lgirdwood@gmail.com<mailto:lgirdwood@gmail.com>;
> > > > broonie@kernel.org<mailto:broonie@kernel.org>;
> > > > robh+dt@kernel.org<mailto:robh+dt@kernel.org>;
> > > > krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org<mailto:krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linar
> > > > o.org>; conor+dt@kernel.org<mailto:conor+dt@kernel.org>;
> > > > shawnguo@kernel.org<mailto:shawnguo@kernel.org>;
> > > > s.hauer@pengutronix.de<mailto:s.hauer@pengutronix.de>;
> > > > linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org<mailto:linux-arm-kernel@lists.in
> > > > fradead.org> Cc: kernel@pengutronix.de<mailto:kernel@pengutronix.de>;
> > > > festevam@gmail.com<mailto:festevam@gmail.com>; dl-linux-imx
> > > > <linux-imx@nxp.com<mailto:linux-imx@nxp.com>>;
> > > > devicetree@vger.kernel.org<mailto:devicetree@vger.kernel.org>;
> > > > linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org<mailto:linux-arm-kernel@lists.in
> > > > fradead.org>;
> > > > linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org<mailto:linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>;
> > > > Joy Zou
> >
> > <joy.zou@nxp.com<mailto:joy.zou@nxp.com>>
> >
> > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] regulator: pca9450: add pca9451a
> > > > support
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > > @@ -104,7 +104,15 @@ static const struct regulator_ops
> > > > > pca9450_ldo_regulator_ops = { * 0.60 to 2.1875V (12.5mV step)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > */
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > static const struct linear_range pca9450_dvs_buck_volts[] = {
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > - REGULATOR_LINEAR_RANGE(600000, 0x00, 0x7F, 12500),
> > > > > + REGULATOR_LINEAR_RANGE(600000, 0x00, 0x7F, 12500), };
> > > > > +
> > > > > +/*
> > > > > + * BUCK1/3
> > > > > + * 0.65 to 2.2375V (12.5mV step)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Reading this comment, it seems the same distinction needs to be done
> > > > for
> > > > BUCK3 as well, no?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Sorry for the late reply!
> > > The BUCK1 and BUCK3 are dual phase, so don't need to be done for BUCK3.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > + */
> > > > > +static const struct linear_range pca9450_trim_dvs_buck_volts[] = {
> > > > > + REGULATOR_LINEAR_RANGE(650000, 0x00, 0x7F, 12500),
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > };
>
>
>
> > > > > @@ -708,8 +917,9 @@ static int pca9450_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client
> > > > > *i2c)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > const struct pca9450_regulator_desc *regulator_desc;
> > > > > struct regulator_config config = { };
> > > > > struct pca9450 *pca9450;
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > - unsigned int device_id, i;
> > > > > + unsigned int device_id, i, val;
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > unsigned int reset_ctrl;
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > + bool pmic_trim = false;
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > int ret;
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > if (!i2c->irq) {
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > @@ -721,6 +931,22 @@ static int pca9450_i2c_probe(struct
> > > > > i2c_client
> > > > > *i2c)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > if (!pca9450)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > return -ENOMEM;
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > + pca9450->regmap = devm_regmap_init_i2c(i2c,
> > > > > +
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > &pca9450_regmap_config);
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > + if (IS_ERR(pca9450->regmap)) {
> > > > > + dev_err(&i2c->dev, "regmap initialization failed\n");
> > > > > + return PTR_ERR(pca9450->regmap);
> > > > > + }
> > > > > +
> > > > > + ret = regmap_read(pca9450->regmap, PCA9450_REG_PWRCTRL,
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > &val);
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > + if (ret) {
> > > > > + dev_err(&i2c->dev, "Read device id error\n");
> > > > > + return ret;
> > > > > + }
> > > > > +
> > > > > + if (val & PCA9450_REG_PWRCTRL_TOFF_DEB)
> > > > > + pmic_trim = true;
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > PCA9450_REG_PWRCTRL is a read/write register. How is it possible to
> > > > detect a chip revision using a bit which can be changed by software
> > > > e.g.
> > > > bootloader? Despite that this bit sets debounce time for
> > > > PMIC_ON_REQ, how is this related to BUCK1 voltage range?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > There are old and new two kind PMIC pca9451a.
> >
> >
> >
> > There is only one part mentioned in the ordering options. How can I
> > distinguish them? Any chip ID, date codes, markings?
>
> Yes, there is only one part. We distinguish the new and old part by this
> bit
Toff_Deb of PCA9450_REG_PWRCTRL reset value. The reset value 0 means
> it's old part, and the reset value 1 means it's new part.
Is the "old" part by coincidence an unofficial prerelease/sample chip?
> >
> >
> > > This bit sets debounce time in
> > > PCA9450_REG_PWRCTRL was set different value by hardware in order to
> > > only distinguish the old and new PMIC. This bit isn't related to the
> > > BUCK1 voltage range. If the pmic_trim is true that means it's new
> > > pca9451a.
>
> >
> >
> > But this bit is writable. How do you know it has not been modified since
> > reset?
> Yes, we don't consider modify the debounce bit case. Modify the Toff_deb
> value
will influence the old and new part judgement.
This judgement seems broken to me. How can I know offline whether I have old
or new parts? I would like to know if there is a difference on some my boards.
> For example, this default value of Toff_deb is 1 in the new part, if the
> customers
change the Toff_deb value from 1 to 0, and then make the board
> warm reset, the Toff_deb value still keep 0, if the Toff_deb value is 0,
> the PMIC driver will think this part is old part. But this part is new part
> in fact.
This should show you it's a bad idea to decide the chip revision depending on
Toff_deb.
> Have discussed this issue with our internal team member, we will add a note
> to PCA9451
datasheet – “Please contract NXP If you want to change
> Toff_deb.” But till now, we am not aware any customers case which need to
> adjust Toff_deb.
>
> Make it more clear: If customers do need to manually adjust Toff_deb, It
> need PMIC driver
update to bypass this bit check and directly apply
> corresponding voltage config table old or new. Thank you very much for your
> comments and efforts.
In this case I need to know if I use old, new or both revision of these parts.
Best regards,
Alexander
--
TQ-Systems GmbH | Mühlstraße 2, Gut Delling | 82229 Seefeld, Germany
Amtsgericht München, HRB 105018
Geschäftsführer: Detlef Schneider, Rüdiger Stahl, Stefan Schneider
http://www.tq-group.com/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-17 14:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-05-31 6:57 [PATCH v1 0/3] add pmic pca9451a support Joy Zou
2023-05-31 6:57 ` Joy Zou
2023-05-31 6:57 ` [PATCH v1 1/3] dt-bindings: regulator: pca9450: add " Joy Zou
2023-05-31 6:57 ` Joy Zou
2023-05-31 6:56 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2023-05-31 6:56 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2023-05-31 7:00 ` [EXT] " Joy Zou
2023-05-31 7:00 ` Joy Zou
2023-05-31 7:22 ` Frieder Schrempf
2023-05-31 7:22 ` Frieder Schrempf
2023-05-31 9:11 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2023-05-31 9:11 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2023-05-31 9:20 ` Frieder Schrempf
2023-05-31 9:20 ` Frieder Schrempf
2023-05-31 10:41 ` [EXT] " Joy Zou
2023-05-31 10:41 ` Joy Zou
2023-05-31 6:57 ` [PATCH v1 2/3] " Joy Zou
2023-05-31 6:57 ` Joy Zou
2023-05-31 11:34 ` Alexander Stein
2023-05-31 11:34 ` Alexander Stein
2023-07-05 6:50 ` [EXT] " Joy Zou
2023-07-05 6:50 ` Joy Zou
2023-07-05 13:12 ` Alexander Stein
2023-07-05 13:12 ` Alexander Stein
2023-07-17 9:53 ` [EXT] " Joy Zou
2023-07-17 9:53 ` Joy Zou
2023-07-17 13:33 ` Mark Brown
2023-07-17 13:33 ` Mark Brown
2023-08-01 10:17 ` Joy Zou
2023-08-01 10:17 ` Joy Zou
[not found] ` <AM6PR04MB59255766CED30160FB552F94E10AA@AM6PR04MB5925.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
2023-10-17 14:02 ` Alexander Stein [this message]
2023-10-17 14:02 ` Alexander Stein
2023-10-19 7:47 ` [EXT] " Joy Zou
2023-10-19 7:47 ` Joy Zou
2023-05-31 6:57 ` [PATCH v1 3/3] arm64: dts: imx93-11x11-evk: " Joy Zou
2023-05-31 6:57 ` Joy Zou
2023-05-31 11:18 ` Mark Brown
2023-05-31 11:18 ` Mark Brown
2023-08-01 10:17 ` [EXT] " Joy Zou
2023-08-01 10:17 ` Joy Zou
2024-03-25 17:44 ` (subset) [PATCH v1 0/3] add pmic " Mark Brown
2024-03-25 17:44 ` Mark Brown
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=2213718.72vocr9iq0@steina-w \
--to=alexander.stein@ew.tq-group.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=conor+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=festevam@gmail.com \
--cc=joy.zou@nxp.com \
--cc=kernel@pengutronix.de \
--cc=krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org \
--cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-imx@nxp.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ping.bai@nxp.com \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=s.hauer@pengutronix.de \
--cc=shawnguo@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.