On 19/07/2023 00:24, Marijn Suijten wrote:
SM6125 is identical to SM6375 except that while downstream also defines a throttle clock, its presence results in timeouts whereas SM6375 requires it to not observe any timeouts. This is represented by reducing the clock array length to 6 so that it cannot be passed. Note that any SoC other than SM6375 (currently SC7180 and SM6350) are unconstrained and could either pass or leave out this "throttle" clock.
Could you please describe, what kind of timeouts do you observe? Is this the DSI underruns issue? If so, it might be fixed by the MDSS interconnect fix ([1]).
[1] https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/116576/
Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- .../devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sc7180-dpu.yaml | 14 ++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+) diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sc7180-dpu.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sc7180-dpu.yaml index 630b11480496..37f66940c5e3 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sc7180-dpu.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sc7180-dpu.yaml @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ properties: compatible: enum: - qcom,sc7180-dpu + - qcom,sm6125-dpu - qcom,sm6350-dpu - qcom,sm6375-dpu@@ -73,6 +74,19 @@ allOf:clock-names: minItems: 7+ - if:+ properties: + compatible: + const: qcom,sm6125-dpu + + then: + properties: + clocks: + maxItems: 6 + + clock-names: + maxItems: 6 + examples: - | #include <dt-bindings/clock/qcom,dispcc-sc7180.h>
-- With best wishes Dmitry
