Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: qcom: monaco-evk: Describe the PCIe M.2 Key E connector
From: Wei Deng
Date: Mon Jul 27 2026 - 23:39:22 EST
Hi Konrad,
On Mon, 27 Jul 2026 16:43:50 +0200, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> On 7/27/26 4:16 PM, Wei Deng wrote:
> > @@ -644,6 +701,12 @@ &pcie1_phy {
> > &pcieport0 {
> > reset-gpios = <&tlmm 2 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>;
> > wake-gpios = <&tlmm 0 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>;
> > +
> > + port {
> > + pcieport0_ep: endpoint {
> > + remote-endpoint = <&m2_e_pcie_ep>;
> > + };
> > + };
>
> This should be defined in the SoC DTSI.
>
> > };
> >
> > &pcieport1 {
> > @@ -923,3 +986,13 @@ &usb_2_hsphy {
> >
> > status = "okay";
> > };
> > +
> > +&uart2 {
> > + status = "okay";
> > +
> > + port {
> > + uart2_ep: endpoint {
> > + remote-endpoint = <&m2_e_uart_ep>;
> > + };
> > + };
>
> On a second thought, it would be logical to move this over there
> as well
>
> Konrad
The concern I have with moving these to monaco.dtsi is that other
boards sharing the same DTSI (e.g. qcs8300-ride.dts) don't have an
M.2 connector. Adding port/endpoint nodes in the SoC DTSI would
create dangling endpoints on those boards.
The lemans-evk series followed the board-level approach (endpoint
defined in lemans-evk.dts) and was accepted by Bjorn. Would you
prefer a different approach for monaco, or is keeping it in the
EVK DTS acceptable here as well?
--
Best Regards,
Wei Deng