From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from bali.collaboradmins.com (bali.collaboradmins.com [148.251.105.195]) (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 600BD33E361; Fri, 13 Feb 2026 12:42:28 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.251.105.195 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1770986549; cv=none; b=muzLRt2dZue/5jx8Il0WUv5Yqt+5XGuQr1p/Ob/ZRvuOYoiECfBIiDugIiOWWE2p32WFjXDt6AyLpd+ywjhCAhVr56KQ5tiMxC3mLRS2yYY7kzIh56iauOojW4nrS7v5qnx2I2NvCj0pgjRBmbQ1Oysqhyo0mLsBUYKXAqp9JiE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1770986549; c=relaxed/simple; bh=izEpIw/KB9kubFDz9uQfuvRTCBTsInmFoaHhC+AejMQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=Xr0TB3tIjEuFN5svvtErX/08nIZ2wd0S4VQ2JUJfYsvDyUELDADI+WPqrdExdaHEEdDAHDLnr1jG6H29JQUd70/Xu+MEu2/eb/0lmuMkGwOOxeXWJfMBIyIO7XhGBq53arjhtLjsElhge73QU1pkQrFX1DQI4wd9tcFtoWo9w0k= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=collabora.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=collabora.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=collabora.com header.i=@collabora.com header.b=Frtcg4KL; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.251.105.195 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=collabora.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=collabora.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=collabora.com header.i=@collabora.com header.b="Frtcg4KL" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=collabora.com; s=mail; t=1770986541; bh=izEpIw/KB9kubFDz9uQfuvRTCBTsInmFoaHhC+AejMQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=Frtcg4KLJw858ZVUurXgIJ9l8/Po+WwnTMcCXlAqrdKypl1EyPQnwo9ahWX7fdsJz gOljecH8T27TxFLgU0+TqO7R1/e/y6gVM2HPbbhX9DE2Kw2CH/+LJUPwzdzYt8JoxD H7dCyXdpUYF3HuuYu7s1voJfVRCTOnh+aM6qhLV3ai619cfjR+3z5NippwkWASnDkv ic3w/geF21yV2hNUe1SOyPvXkTf2jixbJZOn2ss35TRR335Rzhcff1hM2ZeRkg65cz /V12Y/KmP0nsWJK62GCN0ks0AiT2q6dk0U0phGUhhUP+ZNoxHUFySRI/mzwydp+dx4 eEn3nJpNX+Qag== Received: from fedora (unknown [IPv6:2a01:e0a:2c:6930:d919:a6e:5ea1:8a9f]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (prime256v1) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: bbrezillon) by bali.collaboradmins.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A9AEC17E12C6; Fri, 13 Feb 2026 13:42:20 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2026 13:42:15 +0100 From: Boris Brezillon To: Liviu Dudau Cc: Onur =?UTF-8?B?w5Z6a2Fu?= , Mark Brown , daniel.almeida@collabora.com, aliceryhl@google.com, dakr@kernel.org, airlied@gmail.com, simona@ffwll.ch, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lgirdwood@gmail.com, ojeda@kernel.org, rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] drm/tyr: make SRAM supply optional like panthor Message-ID: <20260213134215.27141dfe@fedora> In-Reply-To: References: <20260212100538.170445-1-work@onurozkan.dev> <20260212100538.170445-2-work@onurozkan.dev> <4b00826f-52b1-48a1-b6b5-70ee62f7c014@sirena.org.uk> <20260212151644.4c179594@nimda> <6704ddce-e0bb-4b50-b81a-a098816f3ba3@sirena.org.uk> <20260212134601.7760f414@fedora> <20260212145134.799bb6fa@fedora> <20260212213010.56db1d1d@nimda> Organization: Collabora X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.3.1 (GTK 3.24.51; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, On Fri, 13 Feb 2026 12:15:47 +0000 Liviu Dudau wrote: > On Thu, Feb 12, 2026 at 09:30:10PM +0300, Onur =C3=96zkan wrote: > > On Thu, 12 Feb 2026 14:51:34 +0100 > > Boris Brezillon wrote: > > =20 > > > On Thu, 12 Feb 2026 13:13:31 +0000 > > > Mark Brown wrote: > > > =20 > > > > On Thu, Feb 12, 2026 at 01:46:01PM +0100, Boris Brezillon wrote: =20 > > > > > Mark Brown wrote: =20 > > > > =20 > > > > > > The panthor driver is buggy here and should be fixed, the > > > > > > driver should treat the supply as mandatory and let the system > > > > > > integration work out how it's actually made available. =20 > > > > =20 > > > > > > Trying to open code this just breaks the error handling. =20 > > > > =20 > > > > > Maybe, but the thing is, the DT bindings have been accepted > > > > > already, and it's not something we can easily change. What we can > > > > > do is make this sram-supply mandatory for new compatibles, but we > > > > > can't force it on older/existing SoCs without breaking > > > > > backward-DT compat. =20 > > > >=20 > > > > In practice you can because we do sub in a dummy regulator for > > > > missing supplies, it produces a warning but works fine. If we > > > > didn't do this it'd be basically impossible to add regulator > > > > support to anything at any point after the original merge which is > > > > clearly not reasonable. =20 > > >=20 > > > Okay, I guess we need to fix panthor then... > > > =20 > >=20 > > That + updating the log to something like "sram-supply is missing in > > the DT" would be quite better I think. It would make the issue more > > obvious and convey that the DT file is expected to configure that field > > explicitly. With the current log message, not many people will > > understand the problem at a glance. > >=20 > > As for the bug I described in this patch, we can proceed with the > > alternative solution (updating the DT file) that I mentioned in the > > Zulip thread (the link is included in the patch). Which is this simple > > diff: > >=20 > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3588s-orangepi-5.dtsi > > b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3588s-orangepi-5.dtsi > > index dafad29f9854..a30339fd2c10 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3588s-orangepi-5.dtsi > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3588s-orangepi-5.dtsi > > @@ -177,6 +177,7 @@ &gmac1_rgmii_clk > >=20 > > &gpu { > > mali-supply =3D <&vdd_gpu_s0>; > > + sram-supply =3D <&vdd_gpu_mem_s0>; > > status =3D "okay"; > > }; > >=20 > > @@ -537,7 +538,7 @@ rk806_dvs3_null: dvs3-null-pins { > > }; > >=20 > > regulators { > > - vdd_gpu_s0: dcdc-reg1 { > > + vdd_gpu_s0: vdd_gpu_mem_s0: dcdc-reg1 { =20 >=20 > You don't need to define a new label, using the same supply for mali-supp= ly and > sram-supply should be fine. >=20 > > regulator-name =3D "vdd_gpu_s0"; > > regulator-boot-on; > > regulator-min-microvolt =3D <550000>; > >=20 > > Note that this only fixes the issue for the Orange Pi 5. If we want > > to go further, the same approach should be applied to many other boards > > as well. I can generate a list of the DT files (using a simple Python > > script) that need this update over the weekend. =20 >=20 > Yes, please, but bias the script towards using the same regulator as mali= -supply. >=20 > >=20 > > If we want to go even further and fix all DT files to properly include > > sram-supply we could also enforce that DT files do not omit sram-supply > > in the future. I am not sure this is strictly necessary but it also > > doesn't seem consistent to leave things as they are. Right now, some DT > > files include sram-supply even when there is no separate SRAM rail, > > while others do not. As a result, some boards will continue to print > > that annoying log message. > >=20 > > It's not very clear which approach is best. =20 >=20 > I'm in favor of the proposal here, where we make sram-supply mandatory fo= r non-"mt8196-mali" > SoCs and we patch the DTs to add the sram-supply for those. Works for me. Thanks for chiming in Liviu. Regards, Boris