Re: [PATCH v4 12/12] arm64: dts: qcom: sdm845-lg-common: remove framebuffer reserved-mem

[Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@oss.qualcomm.com>]

On 12/3/25 11:45 AM, David Heidelberg wrote:
> On 03/12/2025 11:37, David Heidelberg wrote:
>> On 03/12/2025 09:42, Paul Sajna wrote:
>>> December 2, 2025 at 10:34 AM, "Konrad Dybcio" <konrad.dybcio@oss.qualcomm.com mailto:konrad.dybcio@oss.qualcomm.com? to=%22Konrad%20Dybcio%22%20%3Ckonrad.dybcio%40oss.qualcomm.com%3E > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 12/2/25 5:41 AM, Paul Sajna wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> December 1, 2025 at 12:41 PM, "Konrad Dybcio" <konrad.dybcio@oss.qualcomm.com mailto:konrad.dybcio@oss.qualcomm.com? to=%22Konrad%20Dybcio%22%20%3Ckonrad.dybcio%40oss.qualcomm.com%3E > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 11/25/25 9:12 AM, Paul Sajna wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>   It causes this warning
>>>>>   [ 0.000000] OF: reserved mem: OVERLAP DETECTED!
>>>>>   framebuffer@9d400000 mailto:framebuffer@9d400000
>>>>>   (0x000000009d400000--0x000000009f800000) overlaps with
>>>>>   memory@9d400000 mailto:memory@9d400000 (0x000000009d400000--0x000000009f800000)
>>>>>   Signed-off-by: Paul Sajna <sajattack@postmarketos.org>
>>>>>   ---
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's defined for both devices that include this dtsi.. perhaps you
>>>>>>   could remove it from there
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   Konrad
>>>>>>
>>>>>   I don't have a judyp to test with and prefer to limit scope.
>>>>>
>>>> This is a mechanical change
>>>>
>>>> Konrad
>>>>
>>>
>>> Sorry, I tried to have a look at what you meant but didn't quite understand. In this patch I changed the dtsi that is included by both already. I don't see any other reserved-mem nodes in judyp. Do you mean I should remove the framebuffer from judyp? I don't think that's wise since a panel driver isn't added as far as I know.
>>
>> I think this warning likely comes from sdm845-mainline repo, as it has extra patches, which trying to abstract framebuffer into sdm845.dtsi, where it likely conflicts, have you tried against clean 6.18-rcX or next?
> 
> ... or sdm845-next repo [1]?
> 
> I sent the patches moving framebuffer from sdm845-mainline repository as RFC [2], but so far it's not clear to me if these should go in or not.

Ok I only did a marginal amount of grepping and judyln/judyp define
framebuffer@9d400000 as the framebuffer device, while sdm845-lg-common
defines memory@9d400000 as a memory region. I assumed they were all the
latter.

I don't see any other framebuffer@9d400000 in sdm845.dtsi so perhaps
David is right..

Konrad