Re: [PATCH 2/3] dt-bindings: arm: qcom: Add Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra

[Sophon Wu]

Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> 于2023年8月6日周日 04:11写道：

>On 05/08/2023 19:03, Xilin Wu via B4 Relay wrote:
>> From: Xilin Wu <wuxilin123@xxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> Add support for Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra. This commit brings support for:
>> * Front and rear display panels (initialized by bootloader)
>> * USB
>> * UFS
>> * PCIe0
>> * Thermistor sensors
>> * ADSP/CDSP/Modem/SLPI
>> * IR Transmitter
>> * RTC provided by PMK8350
>> * Buttons
>>
>
>...
>
>
>> +/*
>> + * Delete following upstream (sm8350.dtsi) reserved
>> + * memory mappings which are different on this device.
>
>
>> + */
>> +/delete-node/ &pil_adsp_mem;
>> +/delete-node/ &pil_slpi_mem;
>> +/delete-node/ &pil_cdsp_mem;
>> +/delete-node/ &pil_ipa_fw_mem;
>> +/delete-node/ &pil_ipa_gsi_mem;
>> +/delete-node/ &pil_gpu_mem;
>> +/delete-node/ &pil_spss_mem;
>> +/delete-node/ &pil_modem_mem;
>> +/delete-node/ &rmtfs_mem;
>> +/delete-node/ &pil_trustedvm_mem;
>> +/delete-node/ &removed_mem;
>> +
>> +/ {
>> +    model = "Xiaomi Mi 11 Ultra";
>> +    compatible = "xiaomi,star", "qcom,sm8350";
>> +    chassis-type = "handset";
>> +
>> +    chosen {
>> +        #address-cells = <2>;
>> +        #size-cells = <2>;
>> +        ranges;
>> +
>> +        framebuffer0: framebuffer-front@ea600000 {
>
>framebuffer@
>
>> +            compatible = "simple-framebuffer";
>> +            reg = <0 0xea600000 0 (1440 * 3200 * 4)>;
>> +
>> +            width = <1440>;
>> +            height = <3200>;
>> +            stride = <(1440 * 4)>;
>> +            format = "a8r8g8b8";
>> +        };
>> +
>> +        framebuffer1: framebuffer-rear@eb79c000 {
>
>framebuffer@
>
>> +            compatible = "simple-framebuffer";
>> +            reg = <0 0xeb79c000 0 (126 * 294 * 4)>;
>> +
>> +            width = <126>;
>> +            height = <294>;
>> +            stride = <(126 * 4)>;
>> +            format = "a8r8g8b8";
>> +        };
>> +    };
>> +
>

Will fix in v2.

>
>
>> +            reg = <0 0x86100000 0 0x3900000>;
>> +            no-map;
>> +        };
>> +
>> +        pil_slpi_mem: memory@89a00000 {
>> +            reg = <0 0x89a00000 0 0x2f00000>;
>> +            no-map;
>> +        };
>> +
>> +        pil_cdsp_mem: memory@8c900000 {
>> +            reg = <0 0x8c900000 0 0x1e00000>;
>> +            no-map;
>> +        };
>> +
>> +        pil_ipa_fw_mem: memory@8e700000 {
>> +            reg = <0 0x8e700000 0 0x10000>;
>> +            no-map;
>> +        };
>> +
>> +        pil_ipa_gsi_mem: memory@8e710000 {
>> +            reg = <0 0x8e710000 0 0xa000>;
>> +            no-map;
>> +        };
>> +
>
>...
>
>> +&pm8350c_gpios {
>> +    gpio-line-names = "VDD_BOOST_5V_EN",
>> +              "NC",
>> +              "OTG_OVP_EN",
>> +              "WL_TXON",
>> +              "NC",
>> +              "NC",
>> +              "NC",
>> +              "NC",
>> +              "NC";
>> +};
>> +
>> +&pmk8350_adc_tm {
>> +    status = "okay";
>> +
>> +    pm8350-skin-therm@0 {
>
>Hm, didn't we change the node names to generic "channel" and started
>using labels? At least in next or ongoing patches? Or was it only for VADC?

I thought it was only for VADC. "channel" is not used in binding as well.