From: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@oss.qualcomm.com>
To: Esteban Urrutia <esteuwu@proton.me>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
Cc: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@kernel.org>,
Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@kernel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@kernel.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org,
phone-devel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: soc: qcom: qcom,pmic-glink: Add compatible string for SM8475
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2026 18:28:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2ace2703-79cb-4046-a2b3-8fdeb9b2c99e@oss.qualcomm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6fc5165c-95b5-475a-a0a6-e1d7b9721222@proton.me>
On 7/31/26 5:54 PM, Esteban Urrutia wrote:
> On 7/31/26 11:30 AM, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>> On 7/31/26 4:44 PM, Esteban Urrutia wrote:
>>> On 7/31/26 5:58 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Jul 31, 2026 at 01:00:08AM -0400, Esteban Urrutia wrote:
>>>>> Due to a different process design, SM8475 (4 nm) SoC takes things from both
>>>>> SM8450 (4 LPX) and SM8550 (4 nm) SoCs.
>>>>
>>>> What things? This is just unspecific and not useful. And I doubt that it
>>>> is even "different process design", because how one would know that?
>>>
>>>
>>> The process design is specified on the corresponding datasheets for
>>> these SoCs, which are flying somewhere around the internet.
>>> Also [1].
>>>
>>>>> Add a separate compatible string for this SoC to avoid possible confusions.
>>>>
>>>> No, explain the hardware compatibility.
>>>>
>>>> Add foo bar, which is not compatible with baz because it uses bam bam in
>>>> different setup (difference in registers, e.g. XYZ and ABC),
>>>
>>> How does this commit message based on what was said in [1] sound to you?
>>
>> That made more sense because the electrical differences are what made
>> the PHY init sequence changes necessary. Here, Krzysztof is trying to
>> express that the pmic-glink interface found on SM8475 is likely no
>> different than the one found on SM8450 (and SM8350 and so on)
>>
>> Then, since it's the same, it can reuse the same driver match data,
>> so patch 2 is unnecessary, since the driver binds said match data
>> on the fallback "qcom,pmic-glink" compatible
>
>
> I don't understand. You're implying that the pmic-glink interface found
> on SM8350 and SM8450 is not that different but they both have different
> quirks on ucsi_glink.c.
> No quirks would be applied on SM8475 if patch 2 is not in place either.
Somehow I confabulated the generic compatible being present in the
driver... I was trying to explain that
And yes I didn't notice the 8350/8450 difference. But anyway, the
resolution will be one of:
// 8450 is fully compatible
"qcom,sm8475-pmic-glink",
"qcom,sm8450-pmic-glink",
"qcom,pmic-glink"
or
// 8475 is special
"qcom,sm8475-pmic-glink",
"qcom,pmic-glink"
depending on what you believe is more correct. I think the first
one fits better.
Konrad
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-31 16:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-31 5:00 [PATCH v2 0/2] Support for pmic-glink in SM8475 Esteban Urrutia via B4 Relay
2026-07-31 5:00 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: soc: qcom: qcom,pmic-glink: Add compatible string for SM8475 Esteban Urrutia via B4 Relay
2026-07-31 9:58 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2026-07-31 14:44 ` Esteban Urrutia
2026-07-31 15:30 ` Konrad Dybcio
2026-07-31 15:54 ` Esteban Urrutia
2026-07-31 16:28 ` Konrad Dybcio [this message]
2026-07-31 16:40 ` Esteban Urrutia
2026-07-31 16:42 ` Konrad Dybcio
2026-07-31 16:56 ` Esteban Urrutia
2026-07-31 5:00 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] usb: typec: ucsi: ucsi_glink: " Esteban Urrutia via B4 Relay
2026-07-31 5:40 ` Esteban Urrutia
2026-07-31 9:59 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2026-07-31 14:48 ` Esteban Urrutia
2026-07-31 10:00 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] Support for pmic-glink in SM8475 Krzysztof Kozlowski
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=2ace2703-79cb-4046-a2b3-8fdeb9b2c99e@oss.qualcomm.com \
--to=konrad.dybcio@oss.qualcomm.com \
--cc=andersson@kernel.org \
--cc=conor+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=esteuwu@proton.me \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com \
--cc=konradybcio@kernel.org \
--cc=krzk+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=krzk@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=phone-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox