From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from phobos.denx.de (phobos.denx.de [85.214.62.61]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 58C72C43334 for ; Thu, 14 Jul 2022 18:27:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from h2850616.stratoserver.net (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by phobos.denx.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3E428403D; Thu, 14 Jul 2022 20:27:54 +0200 (CEST) Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=gerhold.net Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=u-boot-bounces@lists.denx.de Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gerhold.net header.i=@gerhold.net header.b="cfd40AQd"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by phobos.denx.de (Postfix, from userid 109) id 633C084044; Thu, 14 Jul 2022 20:27:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mo4-p02-ob.smtp.rzone.de (mo4-p02-ob.smtp.rzone.de [85.215.255.83]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by phobos.denx.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C1E4B839C3 for ; Thu, 14 Jul 2022 20:27:49 +0200 (CEST) Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=gerhold.net Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=stephan@gerhold.net DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1657823259; s=strato-dkim-0002; d=gerhold.net; h=In-Reply-To:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Cc:Date: From:Subject:Sender; bh=RnLemJaV4dLxh8jrL4W2bJxs/CkmkonVP88uMuGDbKw=; b=cfd40AQdsRRFPucA7rY2KdeRjToRk4POU4iujSGNrwuR6lzXgNBcQircmKSm9rRpHM DYRETgJscXeaXvT1hVGamAd4Ge/fIdx9jnSNfQHtdOzJEcOzWczFRunxFG4noMGhaMj+ j3HB2wtOjzl0wIOXxro9iPzpzxNQ7NDyAeaDipf2nXzmXG3uxUimGJJRS+EspLK9ho8e eFORUWV/RzU0PAWJPww3nAtb6zOJ6+vuZMvULleWd5OVZ2oZsKSzf+BssQHSSUgDmnkj IdFMkX55SCgBS3h64lnXWUwNuWx/q+JWxiOacj2ODNo1MBgS/3/dolL0HS8t2Rc2NZDv qDJA== Authentication-Results: strato.com; dkim=none X-RZG-AUTH: ":P3gBZUipdd93FF5ZZvYFPugejmSTVR2nRPhVOQ/OcYgojyw4j34+u267FZF9PwpcNKLVrKw8+6Y=" X-RZG-CLASS-ID: mo00 Received: from gerhold.net by smtp.strato.de (RZmta 47.47.0 AUTH) with ESMTPSA id he04d0y6EIRd89g (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate); Thu, 14 Jul 2022 20:27:39 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2022 20:27:38 +0200 From: Stephan Gerhold To: Sumit Garg Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de, rfried.dev@gmail.com, peng.fan@nxp.com, jh80.chung@samsung.com, sjg@chromium.org, trini@konsulko.com, dsankouski@gmail.com, vinod.koul@linaro.org, nicolas.dechesne@linaro.org, mworsfold@impinj.com, daniel.thompson@linaro.org, pbrobinson@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 9/9] board: qualcomm: Add support for QCS404 EVB Message-ID: References: <20220712071212.2188390-1-sumit.garg@linaro.org> <20220712071212.2188390-10-sumit.garg@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-BeenThere: u-boot@lists.denx.de X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39 Precedence: list List-Id: U-Boot discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: u-boot-bounces@lists.denx.de Sender: "U-Boot" X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.103.6 at phobos.denx.de X-Virus-Status: Clean On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 01:10:45PM +0530, Sumit Garg wrote: > On Thu, 14 Jul 2022 at 01:02, Stephan Gerhold wrote: > > Can you check how hard it would be to reuse the upstream QCS404 DT? > > > > It turned out to be patch [1] on top of this patch-set. Please help me > to test it on boards you have access to. > > [1] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/patch/20220714073337.2298978-1-sumit.garg@linaro.org/ > Thanks! Do you happen to have time to check the other custom bindings in SDM845 as well? I see two other differences there in addition to the pinctrl: 1. "qcom,msm-geni-uart": Linux has an additional "qcom,geni-se-qup" node around that. 2. The "qcom,pm8998-pwrkey" should be in an additional "qcom,pm8998-pon" container node and then called "qcom,pm8941-pwrkey". Also, in U-Boot the keys are modelled as GPIOs which is a bit strange (I don't think they can be set to output mode for example). But it might be fine to keep that in the -u-boot.dtsi part for now. I would be happy to investigate and test the remaining DB410c-specific parts (e.g. USB there). Cleaning up the DT differences has been on my TODO list for quite some time but I never got to it, sadly... Thanks! Stephan