Re: [PATCH v6 3/3] arm64: dts: qcom: Add Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge DTS/DTSI

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

On 3/26/26 7:30 PM, Maxim Storetvedt wrote:
> 
> 
> On 3/26/26 12:33, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>> On 3/25/26 7:30 PM, Maxim Storetvedt wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/23/26 13:17, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>>>> On 3/22/26 5:03 PM, Maxim Storetvedt wrote:
>>>>> Adds devicetrees for the 14-inch and 16-inch SKUs of the Samsung Galaxy Book4 Edge.
>>>>>
>>>>> These use a common dtsi derived from nodes that were able to work on Linux
>>>>> from the initial Galaxy Book4 Edge DTS by Marcus:
>>>>>
>>>>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/p3mhtj2rp6y2ezuwpd2gu7dwx5cbckfu4s4pazcudi4j2wogtr@4yecb2bkeyms/
>>>>>
>>>>> combined with the ongoing patch for the Honor Magicbook Art 14, and its downstream by
>>>>> Valentin Manea, which shares device similarities:
>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>>> +&i2c8 {
>>>>> +	clock-frequency = <400000>;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +	status = "okay";
>>>>> +
>>>>> +	touchscreen@5d {
>>>>> +		compatible = "hid-over-i2c";
>>>>> +		reg = <0x5d>;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +		hid-descr-addr = <0x1>;
>>>>> +		interrupts-extended = <&tlmm 34 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW>;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +		vdd-supply = <&vreg_misc_3p3>;
>>>>> +		/* Lower power supply is not enoug to work. */
>>>>> +		// vddl-supply = <&vreg_l15b_1p8>;
>>>>
>>>> How should we interpret that?
>>>>
>>>
>>> This was in the original patch, but using that same regulator appears to
>>> be enough to also get touchscreen working on the 16" book4e. That said,
>>> it still does not work on the 14". Something to revisit later...
>>>
>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>>> +&panel {
>>>>> +	compatible = "samsung,atna40cu07", "samsung,atna33xc20";
>>>>
>>>> I think it'd make sense to move the compatible from 'common' to the
>>>> 16in DTS then too
>>>>
>>>>> +	enable-gpios = <&pmc8380_3_gpios 4 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>;
>>>>
>>>> this matches the common definition
>>>>
>>>>> +	power-supply = <&vreg_edp_3p3>;
>>>>
>>>> ditto
>>>>
>>>>> +	no-hpd;
>>>>
>>>> really??
>>>>
>>> One less thing to debug while previously attempting to work around the
>>> "illegal link rate" error, which turned out to be related to eDP 1.4
>>> (similar to the sp11). I've kept it as-is in case other SKUs attempt
>>> booting from this dts, such as the x1e80100 16" (as it might be getting
>>> a black screen using the current x1e84100 16" dts, though this is not
>>> fully tested).
>>
>> So do the 80100 and 84100-equipped SKUs of the laptop come with different
>> displays?
>>
>> Konrad
> 
> So far assumed both 16" variants to be fairly similar, though one
> valiant 16" 80100 user over in the debug thread did try to boot via the
> 84100 dts, with no success. Instead having the screen go dark after the
> first post-tux kernel prints.

Does switching to the generic edp-panel compatible (which will parse the
EDID and try not to be overly smart about it) help here?

> This was strapped together via WSL though, so could be there was
> something else at fault, but strange it didn't at least fall back to a
> visible initramfs shell.

You mean the kernel had been compiled via WSL? That shouldn't be a problem..

Konrad