Hi,
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 4:43 PM Stephen Boyd <swboyd@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> We had to do this spi0/spi6 flip-flop on trogdor-r0 because the spi
> buses got swizzled between r0 and r1. The swizzle stopped after r1, but
> we kept this around to support either hardware possibility and to keep
> trogdor-r0 working.
>
> trogdor-r0 isn't supported upstream, so this swizzle is not doing
> anything besides making a pattern that others try to copy for the EC and
> H1 nodes. Let's remove it and simplify the dts files.
>
> Cc: Joseph Barrera <joebar@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Douglas Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180-trogdor-coachz.dtsi | 5 -----
> arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180-trogdor-homestar.dtsi | 3 ---
> arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180-trogdor-lazor.dtsi | 3 ---
> arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180-trogdor.dtsi | 5 +++--
> 4 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
What about pompom?
What about trogdor-r1?
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180-trogdor-lazor.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180-trogdor-lazor.dtsi
> index 75df5d1633b2..fe2369c29aad 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180-trogdor-lazor.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180-trogdor-lazor.dtsi
> @@ -5,9 +5,6 @@
> * Copyright 2020 Google LLC.
> */
>
> -ap_ec_spi: &spi6 {};
> -ap_h1_spi: &spi0 {};
> -
> #include "sc7180-trogdor.dtsi"
>
> &ap_sar_sensor {
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180-trogdor.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180-trogdor.dtsi
> index 3bf40b6abcba..3123665f6c3c 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180-trogdor.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180-trogdor.dtsi
> @@ -11,6 +11,7 @@
> #include <dt-bindings/regulator/qcom,rpmh-regulator.h>
> #include <dt-bindings/sound/sc7180-lpass.h>
>
> +#include "sc7180.dtsi"
If we're going to move the "sc7180.dtsi" to trogdor then we should
move it for everyone, right? Right now you're _only_ removing it from
coachz. I think that means that for every other board the
"sc7180.dtsi" file is included more than once. These aren't like C
header files where there's a convention to have header guards.
I _think_ that could actually cause problems too, right? So if you
include it once and then you override a status to "okay" and then you
included it again it might get changed back to "disabled" ?
The easiest solution would be to just leave the sc7180.dtsi include
where it was. If you want to try to do better, I _think_ (but haven't
tried) that you can change all of the existing includes of
"sc7180.dtsi" to be includes of "sc7180-trogdor.dtsi" and then remove
the existing includes of "sc7180-trogdor.dtsi". IIRC the reason that
the sc7180.dtsi include is scattered everywhere is that we needed the
i2c bus before we could define the parade / ti bridge but then we
needed the parade / ti bridge before we included the board specific
bits so we could define the panel.
