| Message ID | 20220705133917.8405-5-ansuelsmth@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Add ipq806x missing bindings | expand |
On 05/07/2022 15:39, Christian Marangi wrote: > Mikrotik RB3011 have a special configuration where the regulators are > not the common smb208 controlled by RPM but they use a TPS563900 > controlled via i2c. Disable the smb208 for this specific device. > > Signed-off-by: Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@gmail.com> > Reviewed-by: Jonathan McDowell <noodles@earth.li> > Tested-by: Jonathan McDowell <noodles@earth.li> This is the first version of patchset. How did the Rb/Tb tags appear? Best regards, Krzysztof
On Wed, Jul 06, 2022 at 10:34:50AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 05/07/2022 15:39, Christian Marangi wrote: > > Mikrotik RB3011 have a special configuration where the regulators are > > not the common smb208 controlled by RPM but they use a TPS563900 > > controlled via i2c. Disable the smb208 for this specific device. > > > > Signed-off-by: Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@gmail.com> > > Reviewed-by: Jonathan McDowell <noodles@earth.li> > > Tested-by: Jonathan McDowell <noodles@earth.li> > > This is the first version of patchset. How did the Rb/Tb tags appear? > > Best regards, > Krzysztof Will add in the cover letter where this comes from. Didn't add this as this series contains less patch and other changes than the prev series but now I will do so we know where these tags comes from.
On Wed, Jul 06, 2022 at 03:03:32PM +0200, Konrad Dybcio wrote: > > > On 5.07.2022 15:39, Christian Marangi wrote: > > Mikrotik RB3011 have a special configuration where the regulators are > > not the common smb208 controlled by RPM but they use a TPS563900 > > controlled via i2c. Disable the smb208 for this specific device. > Ok, so that answers my question from the previous email. > Please define the SMB208 regulators only in the DTs of > boards that actually use it, as it is not a SoC component as > far as I can tell. > > Konrad This was already discuessed, rb3011 is the exception, qcom for ipq8064 recommends to use smb208 but gives the option to implement it in their own way. So again we have 28 device with smb208 and 1 device that use its own special way... Wonder if a separate dtsi can be used for this if we really can't put smb208 in ipq8064 dtsi? > > > > Signed-off-by: Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@gmail.com> > > Reviewed-by: Jonathan McDowell <noodles@earth.li> > > Tested-by: Jonathan McDowell <noodles@earth.li> > > --- > > arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064-rb3011.dts | 4 ++++ > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064-rb3011.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064-rb3011.dts > > index 9034f00f2bd8..f651e813d75a 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064-rb3011.dts > > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064-rb3011.dts > > @@ -218,6 +218,10 @@ led@7 { > > }; > > }; > > > > +&smb208_regulators { > > + status = "disabled"; > > +}; > > + > > &adm_dma { > > status = "okay"; > > };
On 5.07.2022 15:39, Christian Marangi wrote: > Mikrotik RB3011 have a special configuration where the regulators are > not the common smb208 controlled by RPM but they use a TPS563900 > controlled via i2c. Disable the smb208 for this specific device. Ok, so that answers my question from the previous email. Please define the SMB208 regulators only in the DTs of boards that actually use it, as it is not a SoC component as far as I can tell. Konrad > > Signed-off-by: Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@gmail.com> > Reviewed-by: Jonathan McDowell <noodles@earth.li> > Tested-by: Jonathan McDowell <noodles@earth.li> > --- > arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064-rb3011.dts | 4 ++++ > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064-rb3011.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064-rb3011.dts > index 9034f00f2bd8..f651e813d75a 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064-rb3011.dts > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064-rb3011.dts > @@ -218,6 +218,10 @@ led@7 { > }; > }; > > +&smb208_regulators { > + status = "disabled"; > +}; > + > &adm_dma { > status = "okay"; > };
On Wed, Jul 06, 2022 at 03:31:55PM +0200, Konrad Dybcio wrote: > > > On 6.07.2022 14:56, Christian Marangi wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 06, 2022 at 03:03:32PM +0200, Konrad Dybcio wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 5.07.2022 15:39, Christian Marangi wrote: > >>> Mikrotik RB3011 have a special configuration where the regulators are > >>> not the common smb208 controlled by RPM but they use a TPS563900 > >>> controlled via i2c. Disable the smb208 for this specific device. > >> Ok, so that answers my question from the previous email. > >> Please define the SMB208 regulators only in the DTs of > >> boards that actually use it, as it is not a SoC component as > >> far as I can tell. > >> > >> Konrad > > > > This was already discuessed, > Yeah sorry, I didn't notice earlier and started reviewing patches > that were already reviewed by others. > Np, thanks for the review. > > rb3011 is the exception, qcom for ipq8064 > > recommends to use smb208 but gives the option to implement it in their > > own way. So again we have 28 device with smb208 and 1 device that use > > its own special way... > > > > Wonder if a separate dtsi can be used for this if we really can't put > > smb208 in ipq8064 dtsi? > There's msm8916-pm8916.dtsi. You can follow. Ok, will put the smb208 definition to a separate dtsi, something like ipq8064-smb208.dtsi? or ipq8064-rpm-smb208.dtsi? Looks also cleaner that way. > > Konrad > > [...]
On Wed, Jul 06, 2022 at 03:37:36PM +0200, Konrad Dybcio wrote: > > > On 6.07.2022 15:19, Christian Marangi wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 06, 2022 at 03:31:55PM +0200, Konrad Dybcio wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 6.07.2022 14:56, Christian Marangi wrote: > >>> On Wed, Jul 06, 2022 at 03:03:32PM +0200, Konrad Dybcio wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On 5.07.2022 15:39, Christian Marangi wrote: > >>>>> Mikrotik RB3011 have a special configuration where the regulators are > >>>>> not the common smb208 controlled by RPM but they use a TPS563900 > >>>>> controlled via i2c. Disable the smb208 for this specific device. > >>>> Ok, so that answers my question from the previous email. > >>>> Please define the SMB208 regulators only in the DTs of > >>>> boards that actually use it, as it is not a SoC component as > >>>> far as I can tell. > >>>> > >>>> Konrad > >>> > >>> This was already discuessed, > >> Yeah sorry, I didn't notice earlier and started reviewing patches > >> that were already reviewed by others. > >> > > > > Np, thanks for the review. > > > >> > >> rb3011 is the exception, qcom for ipq8064 > >>> recommends to use smb208 but gives the option to implement it in their > >>> own way. So again we have 28 device with smb208 and 1 device that use > >>> its own special way... > >>> > >>> Wonder if a separate dtsi can be used for this if we really can't put > >>> smb208 in ipq8064 dtsi? > >> There's msm8916-pm8916.dtsi. You can follow. > > > > Ok, will put the smb208 definition to a separate dtsi, something like > > ipq8064-smb208.dtsi? or ipq8064-rpm-smb208.dtsi? Looks also cleaner that > > way. > You can create ipq8064-smb208.dtsi that will also contain every ipq8064-plus-smb208-specific > configuration, such as regulator assignemnts to in-SoC components (like PHYs, SDHCIs etc.). Just for reference there regulators are used only for cpu voltage, l2 cache and special ubi32 cores that are not supported currently, nothing more. > > Konrad > > > >> > >> Konrad > >> > >> [...] > >
On 6.07.2022 14:56, Christian Marangi wrote: > On Wed, Jul 06, 2022 at 03:03:32PM +0200, Konrad Dybcio wrote: >> >> >> On 5.07.2022 15:39, Christian Marangi wrote: >>> Mikrotik RB3011 have a special configuration where the regulators are >>> not the common smb208 controlled by RPM but they use a TPS563900 >>> controlled via i2c. Disable the smb208 for this specific device. >> Ok, so that answers my question from the previous email. >> Please define the SMB208 regulators only in the DTs of >> boards that actually use it, as it is not a SoC component as >> far as I can tell. >> >> Konrad > > This was already discuessed, Yeah sorry, I didn't notice earlier and started reviewing patches that were already reviewed by others. rb3011 is the exception, qcom for ipq8064 > recommends to use smb208 but gives the option to implement it in their > own way. So again we have 28 device with smb208 and 1 device that use > its own special way... > > Wonder if a separate dtsi can be used for this if we really can't put > smb208 in ipq8064 dtsi? There's msm8916-pm8916.dtsi. You can follow. Konrad [...]
On 6.07.2022 15:19, Christian Marangi wrote: > On Wed, Jul 06, 2022 at 03:31:55PM +0200, Konrad Dybcio wrote: >> >> >> On 6.07.2022 14:56, Christian Marangi wrote: >>> On Wed, Jul 06, 2022 at 03:03:32PM +0200, Konrad Dybcio wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 5.07.2022 15:39, Christian Marangi wrote: >>>>> Mikrotik RB3011 have a special configuration where the regulators are >>>>> not the common smb208 controlled by RPM but they use a TPS563900 >>>>> controlled via i2c. Disable the smb208 for this specific device. >>>> Ok, so that answers my question from the previous email. >>>> Please define the SMB208 regulators only in the DTs of >>>> boards that actually use it, as it is not a SoC component as >>>> far as I can tell. >>>> >>>> Konrad >>> >>> This was already discuessed, >> Yeah sorry, I didn't notice earlier and started reviewing patches >> that were already reviewed by others. >> > > Np, thanks for the review. > >> >> rb3011 is the exception, qcom for ipq8064 >>> recommends to use smb208 but gives the option to implement it in their >>> own way. So again we have 28 device with smb208 and 1 device that use >>> its own special way... >>> >>> Wonder if a separate dtsi can be used for this if we really can't put >>> smb208 in ipq8064 dtsi? >> There's msm8916-pm8916.dtsi. You can follow. > > Ok, will put the smb208 definition to a separate dtsi, something like > ipq8064-smb208.dtsi? or ipq8064-rpm-smb208.dtsi? Looks also cleaner that > way. You can create ipq8064-smb208.dtsi that will also contain every ipq8064-plus-smb208-specific configuration, such as regulator assignemnts to in-SoC components (like PHYs, SDHCIs etc.). Konrad > >> >> Konrad >> >> [...] >
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064-rb3011.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064-rb3011.dts index 9034f00f2bd8..f651e813d75a 100644 --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064-rb3011.dts +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq8064-rb3011.dts @@ -218,6 +218,10 @@ led@7 { }; }; +&smb208_regulators { + status = "disabled"; +}; + &adm_dma { status = "okay"; };