Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: qcom: ipq5210: add the bootph-all property

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 09/04/2026 11:28, Kathiravan Thirumoorthy wrote:
> Add the bootph-all property to the nodes which are utilized by the
> bootloaders.

Uh oh, so it started for qcom too? I really don't like how these bootph
properties spread all over, so please provide arguments - which pure
upstream bootloaders exactly and why exactly these nodes.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Kathiravan Thirumoorthy <kathiravan.thirumoorthy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/ipq5210-rdp504.dts |  5 +++++
>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/ipq5210.dtsi       | 10 ++++++++++
>  2 files changed, 15 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/ipq5210-rdp504.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/ipq5210-rdp504.dts
> index 941f866ecfe9..56dbc506da78 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/ipq5210-rdp504.dts
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/ipq5210-rdp504.dts
> @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@ aliases {
>  
>  	chosen {
>  		stdout-path = "serial0";
> +		bootph-all;

Since when do we add bootph-all to chosen? Which broken bootloader
ignores chosen?

This really makes me wonder that you do all this for some downstream forks.

>  	};
>  };
>  
> @@ -41,6 +42,7 @@ qup_uart1_default_state: qup-uart1-default-state {
>  		function = "qup_se1";
>  		drive-strength = <6>;
>  		bias-pull-down;
> +		bootph-all;
>  	};
And that's a pin, not a device. What is the point of marking it? The
device needing this pin will have phandle which must pull the node.

Best regards,
Krzysztof