Re: [PATCH 0/3] arm64: dts: rockchip: Add device tree for the Orange Pi CM5 Base board

[Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>]

Hi Cristian,

On Thu, Oct 02, 2025 at 10:24:59PM +0300, Cristian Ciocaltea wrote:
> On 10/2/25 6:47 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > Hello,
> > 
> > This patch series adds a device tree for the Orange Pi CM5 Base board
> > from Xunlong. This is a combination of a compute module and a carrier
> > board, so the device tree is split in two files.
> > 
> > The work is based on a combination of upstream device trees for other
> > RK3588-based Orange Pi boards and the downstream device tree, all
> > checked against the available schematics for the carrier board. The
> > compute module schematics is unfortunately not available.
> > 
> > The series starts by adding a new compatible for the board to
> > arm/rockchip.yaml. The next patch documents a missing property in the
> > rk3588-dw-hdmi-qp bindings that the device tree needs. Finally, the last
> > patch adds the device tree.
> > 
> > Patch 2/3 may be slightly controversial as the new DT property could be
> > better named. 
> 
> Indeed :-). As a matter of fact I've already planned to introduce it as
> "tmds-enable-gpios" [1], during my recent FRL related work.
> 
> > It has been supported in the driver for a year now, so
> > there could be users in the wild. I have therefore decided to keep the
> > current name. I am open to alternative solutions.
> 
> As mentioned in [2], this was "inherited" from downstream and hasn't been
> really in use so far.  I intended to do some more testing before attempting
> to send those patches upstream, as for now I couldn't notice any (obvious)
> change in behavior when switching between TMDS and FRL, with or without
> making use of it in DT.

Thanks for the links. The new property name is better. We may need to
preserve backward compatibility though, how confident are you that the
enabled-gpios property isn't used in the wild ?

I'd like to get the device tree for the Orange Pi CM5 merged sooner than
later. Would you post those two patches, or should I take them in the v2
of my series ?

> [1] https://gitlab.collabora.com/hardware-enablement/rockchip-3588/linux/-/commit/5a32a84ee3e801daaeb974f967f6e213983feeb4
> [2] https://gitlab.collabora.com/hardware-enablement/rockchip-3588/linux/-/commit/df4d94fdb94463dd4175338bf7044b40c5e559e4

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart