On 14/01/2025 11:00, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 at 09:57, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 04:03:10PM +0800, Yongxing Mou wrote: >>> +patternProperties: >>> + "^display-controller@[0-9a-f]+$": >>> + type: object >>> + additionalProperties: true >>> + >>> + properties: >>> + compatible: >>> + items: >>> + - const: qcom,qcs8300-dpu >>> + - const: qcom,sa8775p-dpu >>> + >>> + "^displayport-controller@[0-9a-f]+$": >>> + type: object >>> + additionalProperties: true >>> + >>> + properties: >>> + compatible: >>> + items: >>> + - const: qcom,qcs8300-dp >>> + - const: qcom,sm8650-dp >> >> Parts of qcs8300 display are compatible with sa8775p, other parts with >> sm8650. That's odd or even not correct. Assuming it is actually correct, >> it deserves explanation in commit msg. > > It seems to be correct. These are two different IP blocks with > different modifications. QCS8300's DP configuration matches the SM8650 > ([1]), though the DPU is the same as the one on the SA8775P platform. > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/dri-devel/411626da-7563-48fb-ac7c-94f06e73e4b8@xxxxxxxxxxx/ That's the driver, so you claim that qcs8300, which is a sa8775p, is not compatible with sa8775p because of current driver code? You see the contradiction? sa8775p is not compatible with sa8775p because of current driver patch? I don't think it is correct, but let's repeat: if you think otherwise, this should be explain in commit msg. Best regards, Krzysztof
