Signed-off-by: Konrad Dybcio <[email protected]>
---
arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8994.dtsi | 6 ++++++
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8994.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8994.dtsi
index f989530ffa90..838ffc0d9c16 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8994.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8994.dtsi
@@ -142,6 +142,12 @@ core3 {
};
};
+ firmware {
+ scm {
+ compatible = "qcom,scm-msm8992";
+ };
+ };
+
memory {
device_type = "memory";
/* We expect the bootloader to fill in the reg */
--
2.27.0
On Tue 23 Jun 15:48 PDT 2020, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Konrad Dybcio <[email protected]>
> ---
> arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8994.dtsi | 6 ++++++
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8994.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8994.dtsi
> index f989530ffa90..838ffc0d9c16 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8994.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8994.dtsi
> @@ -142,6 +142,12 @@ core3 {
> };
> };
>
> + firmware {
> + scm {
> + compatible = "qcom,scm-msm8992";
Shouldn't this be "qcom,scm-msm8992", "qcom,scm" ?
(Or rather "qcom,scm-msm8994", "qcom,scm")
Regards,
Bjorn
> + };
> + };
> +
> memory {
> device_type = "memory";
> /* We expect the bootloader to fill in the reg */
> --
> 2.27.0
>
>Shouldn't this be "qcom,scm-msm8992", "qcom,scm" ?
>
>(Or rather "qcom,scm-msm8994", "qcom,scm")
Some DTs only have the SoC-specific one, and some also
have the generic one. But I can add the generic one if
you wish.
I went with 8992, as I added it in the 8992 series
(gonna update that one soon, too, so we can get it merged)
and I didn't want to needlessly duplicate it. Ideally maybe we
could switch to just qcom,scm for clockless SCM compats?
Regards
Konrad
On Tue 23 Jun 16:30 PDT 2020, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> >Shouldn't this be "qcom,scm-msm8992", "qcom,scm" ?
> >
> >(Or rather "qcom,scm-msm8994", "qcom,scm")
>
> Some DTs only have the SoC-specific one, and some also
> have the generic one. But I can add the generic one if
> you wish.
>
> I went with 8992, as I added it in the 8992 series
> (gonna update that one soon, too, so we can get it merged)
> and I didn't want to needlessly duplicate it. Ideally maybe we
> could switch to just qcom,scm for clockless SCM compats?
>
It's fairly common practice to specify both a specific and a generic
compatible, this would allow us to in the driver do special handling of
the specific in the future if we need to - without having to update the
devicetree.
Regards,
Bjorn