mbox series

[v2,0/3] QCM2290 LMH

Message ID 20240308-topic-rb1_lmh-v2-0-bac3914b0fe3@linaro.org
Headers show
Series QCM2290 LMH | expand

Message

Konrad Dybcio March 9, 2024, 1:15 p.m. UTC
Wire up LMH on QCM2290 and fix a bad bug while at it.

P1-2 for thermal, P3 for qcom

Signed-off-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>
---
Changes in v2:
- Pick up tags
- Fix a couple typos in commit messages
- Drop stray msm8998 binding addition
- Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240308-topic-rb1_lmh-v1-0-50c60ffe1130@linaro.org

---
Konrad Dybcio (2):
      dt-bindings: thermal: lmh: Add QCM2290 compatible
      thermal: qcom: lmh: Check for SCM availability at probe

Loic Poulain (1):
      arm64: dts: qcom: qcm2290: Add LMH node

 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/thermal/qcom-lmh.yaml | 12 ++++++++----
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcm2290.dtsi                   | 14 +++++++++++++-
 drivers/thermal/qcom/lmh.c                              |  3 +++
 3 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
---
base-commit: 8ffc8b1bbd505e27e2c8439d326b6059c906c9dd
change-id: 20240308-topic-rb1_lmh-1e0f440c392a

Best regards,

Comments

Bjorn Andersson March 19, 2024, 2:48 a.m. UTC | #1
On Sat, 09 Mar 2024 14:15:01 +0100, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> Wire up LMH on QCM2290 and fix a bad bug while at it.
> 
> P1-2 for thermal, P3 for qcom
> 
> 

Applied, thanks!

[3/3] arm64: dts: qcom: qcm2290: Add LMH node
      commit: 7d6d561fa934594faf359f6fffee0e2dd59f8110

Best regards,
Krzysztof Kozlowski March 27, 2024, 4:04 a.m. UTC | #2
On 26/03/2024 15:07, NĂ­colas F. R. A. Prado wrote:
>> Other reports, like for cases when only parts of patch is applied, could
>> be also useful but I am afraid you will generate way too much of them.
>> Binding is supposed to go via subsystem, DTS via SoC, so basically 90%
>> of patchsets might have some sort of delays resulting in dtbs_check
>> false positive warnings.
>>
>> For my SoC I check my trees, mainline and next, and keep adding list of
>> exceptions for expected issues. What's useful for Qualcomm? Konrad,
> 
> Is that list of exceptions in-tree? If there are known false-positives (issues

None of the warnings - C, sparse, smatch, coccinelle, Coverity, dtc,
dtbs_check - are stored in-tree. I don't think dtbs_check should be here
exception, because all these warnings can be fixed - it's just a matter
of effort. ARM64 Exynos is warning free since a year. ARM Exynos
similarly, but with one undocumented compatible and few bumps due to
intra-cycle DTS changes.

> that can't be "properly" fixed), they should be public knowledge. And if we all

They are "public":
https://github.com/krzk/tools/blob/master/buildbot/master_build_common.py#L26

but I don't know how to make them public and usable knowledge.

Best regards,
Krzysztof