Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] arm64: dts: exynos: Add initial support for Samsung Galaxy S20 5G (x1s)

[Ivaylo Ivanov <ivo.ivanov.ivanov1@gmail.com>]

On 10/31/24 01:23, Umer Uddin wrote:
> Add initial support for the Samsung Galaxy S20 5G (x1s/SM-G981B)
> phone. It was launched in 2020, and it's based on the Exynos 990 SoC. It
> has only one configuration with 12GB of RAM and 128GB of UFS 3.0 storage.
>
> This device tree adds support for the following:
>
> - SimpleFB
> - 12GB RAM
> - Buttons
>
> Signed-off-by: Umer Uddin <umer.uddin@mentallysanemainliners.org>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile          |  1 +
>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos990-x1s.dts | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++
>  2 files changed, 29 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos990-x1s.dts
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile
> index 7a934499b..deb8dc509 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/Makefile
> @@ -9,5 +9,6 @@ dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS) += \
>  	exynos850-e850-96.dtb		\
>  	exynos8895-dreamlte.dtb		\
>  	exynos990-c1s.dtb		\
> +	exynos990-x1s.dtb		\
>  	exynosautov9-sadk.dtb		\
>  	exynosautov920-sadk.dtb
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos990-x1s.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos990-x1s.dts
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000..162961446
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos990-x1s.dts
> @@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 OR BSD-3-Clause
> +/*
> + * Samsung Galaxy S20 5G (x1s/SM-G981B) device tree source
> + *
> + * Copyright (c) 2024, Umer Uddin <umer.uddin@mentallysanemainliners.org>
> + */
> +
> +/dts-v1/;
> +#include "exynos990-hubble-common.dtsi"
> +
> +/ {
> +	#address-cells = <2>;
> +	#size-cells = <2>;
> +
> +	model = "Samsung Galaxy S20 5G";
> +	compatible = "samsung,x1s", "samsung,exynos990";
> +
> +	memory@80000000 {
> +		device_type = "memory";
> +		reg = <0x0 0x80000000 0x0 0x3ab00000>,
> +		      /* Memory hole */
> +		      <0x0 0xc1200000 0x0 0x1ee00000>,
> +		      /* Memory hole */
> +		      <0x0 0xe1900000 0x0 0x1e700000>,
> +		      /* Memory hole */

The space from 0x100000000 to 0x880000000 isn't a hole in the memory
though, is it? 0x880000000 is in the 64 bit address space.

Best regards, Ivo.

> +		      <0x8 0x80000000 0x2 0x7e800000>;
> +	};
> +};