Re: [PATCH v6 2/4] dt-bindings: display: msm: sm6150-mdss: Fix example indentation and OPP values

[Xiangxu Yin]

On 10/29/2025 4:00 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 24, 2025 at 01:21:02PM +0800, Xiangxu Yin via B4 Relay wrote:
>> From: Xiangxu Yin <xiangxu.yin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> - Adjusted indentation and added missing blank lines in the example.
>> - Corrected OPP clock values to match actual DTS configuration.
> See Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst to check how to write
> proper commit messages.


Ok, will refer guide to update commit msg.


>> Signed-off-by: Xiangxu Yin <xiangxu.yin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>  .../bindings/display/msm/qcom,sm6150-mdss.yaml     | 32 ++++++++++++----------
>>  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sm6150-mdss.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sm6150-mdss.yaml
>> index ba0dea2edea98cee0826cf38b3f33361666e004a..80183df71cd9288f652dc42afeae101e8edcbe65 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sm6150-mdss.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sm6150-mdss.yaml
>> @@ -140,35 +140,37 @@ examples:
>>                  #size-cells = <0>;
>>  
>>                  port@0 {
>> -                  reg = <0>;
>> -                  dpu_intf0_out: endpoint {
>> -                  };
>> +                    reg = <0>;
>> +
>> +                    dpu_intf0_out: endpoint {
>> +                    };
>>                  };
>>  
>>                  port@1 {
>> -                  reg = <1>;
>> -                  dpu_intf1_out: endpoint {
>> -                      remote-endpoint = <&mdss_dsi0_in>;
>> -                  };
>> +                    reg = <1>;
>> +
>> +                    dpu_intf1_out: endpoint {
>> +                        remote-endpoint = <&mdss_dsi0_in>;
>> +                    };
>>                  };
>>              };
>>  
>>              mdp_opp_table: opp-table {
>>                  compatible = "operating-points-v2";
>>  
>> -                opp-19200000 {
>> -                  opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <19200000>;
>> -                  required-opps = <&rpmhpd_opp_low_svs>;
>> +                opp-192000000 {
> This is not necessary. This is just an example, so it doesn't matter,
> which values are actually written here.


Yes, but I think correct value is better?


>> +                    opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <192000000>;
>> +                    required-opps = <&rpmhpd_opp_low_svs>;
>>                  };
>>  
>> -                opp-25600000 {
>> -                  opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <25600000>;
>> -                  required-opps = <&rpmhpd_opp_svs>;
>> +                opp-256000000 {
>> +                    opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <256000000>;
>> +                    required-opps = <&rpmhpd_opp_svs>;
>>                  };
>>  
>>                  opp-307200000 {
>> -                  opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <307200000>;
>> -                  required-opps = <&rpmhpd_opp_nom>;
>> +                    opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <307200000>;
>> +                    required-opps = <&rpmhpd_opp_nom>;
>>                  };
>>              };
>>          };
>>
>> -- 
>> 2.34.1
>>
>>