From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.mainlining.org (mail.mainlining.org [5.75.144.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5F504273803; Fri, 27 Mar 2026 20:38:33 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=5.75.144.95 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1774643915; cv=none; b=RaW6En1Na+B3t4VPXYhxx3kjMfNAGONQwaE2OUya+Z2aQbMk3NlWIWggys7rBdYg4nnMtMtZvJKwDxtxgsFiFf9HIQfBDsfI9rXqdWRWcjjAERUcjvGar1OgjWgCiwd4DWQ7e06E0xc03EII/bHhRUY9OK/dUT3mROC+GH0YDNA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1774643915; c=relaxed/simple; bh=velu1am4+VNpqkfzGyKXqWSHvGvMVzzmAvWH2+YtEts=; h=MIME-Version:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References: Message-ID:Content-Type; b=u4AvnJnxJwabg2yuZ+WSFteUhrzvIcx78F7yD2qYEtY5BkjRvb1AxGTyYbF8O7Xg0za3CsZV2Oa56Y9bI/JqfSquDT+JiTNhTEkYo7BRkoxZmicz4xPtSSrjN5+LxFvzO8eB0kMqqUrI3Mjfx6TzggVqpk3uM57QSHb/exlPGq4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=mainlining.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=mainlining.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mainlining.org header.i=@mainlining.org header.b=KAp/Dnec; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=mainlining.org header.i=@mainlining.org header.b=YZPJBYH4; arc=none smtp.client-ip=5.75.144.95 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=mainlining.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=mainlining.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mainlining.org header.i=@mainlining.org header.b="KAp/Dnec"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=mainlining.org header.i=@mainlining.org header.b="YZPJBYH4" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=202507r; d=mainlining.org; c=relaxed/relaxed; h=Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date; t=1774643900; bh=JrpWE3E6WVfMaCdcXTL+7Ee X9ScqCGdL5vmEJuenNCg=; b=KAp/Dneca9rUA1QoJ5vbE9VM52xETH0OIMpB16RMHQS1rwWXXN 9S5tndzLZy9mTXJ4t0PMwUBBEfAugylgXpcXgdipWpMzXFUvZuNNHFLtF/Bufdk83JaBs81WcLP AZ0N+hT/6e6wX8GfjZBA5RXv7rZsnemKtsOfRgsXq/gCU2/3EOPkRMO5LEZzU1cwCrblEsLgJ2J 61QG4OtBPeofGCi6nea48gHRwYM/hxIbkrEAMHJd1qbRu+u8kzMSBV6rDIU2KweMEodq8/Sx6k4 wHCuQEA8ct4X4v5jdM0TG+SaXpG2LoB/A7e5B7Lhja2HsRWvIHZcmSMOZtWbGEqNnzQ==; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; s=202507e; d=mainlining.org; c=relaxed/relaxed; h=Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date; t=1774643900; bh=JrpWE3E6WVfMaCdcXTL+7Ee X9ScqCGdL5vmEJuenNCg=; b=YZPJBYH4+g3k/3zsJvUayccpePSEyWtbOMbP3Mtv+R7I3vXf9N zC1P5dnV0mg48ab5vcnhf75ZznEeNCgzZPBA==; Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2026 21:38:20 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?Q?Barnab=C3=A1s_Cz=C3=A9m=C3=A1n?= To: Dmitry Baryshkov Cc: Rob Herring , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Conor Dooley , Bjorn Andersson , Ulf Hansson , Mathieu Poirier , Konrad Dybcio , Stephan Gerhold , linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] MSM8953/SDM632 rpmpd/mss fixes In-Reply-To: References: <20260327-sdm632-rpmpd-v1-0-6098dc997d66@mainlining.org> Message-ID: <083d2560294855857663df23e8900f9b@mainlining.org> X-Sender: barnabas.czeman@mainlining.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 2026-03-27 21:33, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > On Fri, Mar 27, 2026 at 09:11:42PM +0100, Barnabás Czémán wrote: >> SDM632 pm domains are different from MSM8953 because MSM8953 >> is defining pm8953_s1 as regulator but SDM632 is defining it >> as pm domain. >> >> This patch series correcting the pm domains defined in rpmpd >> driver and splitting the MSS resources for the both SoC to match >> the reality. >> >> These changes was discussed in a previous threads: >> https://lore.kernel.org/all/2b057aa5-4416-4fd4-aeab-6bc23acbb53d@oss.qualcomm.com/ > > Was 4.9 never expected to work on MSM8953? Or did it require firmware > changes? There is no official 4.9 kernel for MSM8953 devices, all of them are using 3.18. There are unofficial 4.9 ports for those devices but all of them defining s1 as a regulator so the regulators were changed back like it was on 3.18. > >> >> Signed-off-by: Barnabás Czémán >> ---