On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 03:54:05PM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 01:23:11PM -0500, Brian Masney wrote:
> > According to the downstream 5.4 kernel sources for the sa8540p,
> > i2c@894000 is labeled i2c bus 21, not 5. The interrupts and clocks
> > also match. Let's go ahead and correct the name that's used in the
> > three files where this is listed.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Brian Masney <bmasney@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Fixes: 152d1faf1e2f3 ("arm64: dts: qcom: add SC8280XP platform")
> > Fixes: ccd3517faf183 ("arm64: dts: qcom: sc8280xp: Add reference device")
> > Fixes: 32c231385ed43 ("arm64: dts: qcom: sc8280xp: add Lenovo Thinkpad X13s devicetree")
>
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc8280xp.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc8280xp.dtsi
> > index 109c9d2b684d..875cc91324ce 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc8280xp.dtsi
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc8280xp.dtsi
> > @@ -827,7 +827,7 @@ qup2_uart17: serial@884000 {
> > status = "disabled";
> > };
> >
> > - qup2_i2c5: i2c@894000 {
> > + qup2_i2c21: i2c@894000 {
>
> Note that the node is labelled qup2_i2c5 and not qup_i2c5.
>
> That is, the QUP nodes are labelled using two indices, and specifically
>
> qup2_i2c5
>
> would be another name for
>
> qup_i2c21
>
> if we'd been using such a flat naming scheme (there are 8 engines per
> QUP).
>
> So there's nothing wrong with how these nodes are currently named, but
> mixing the two scheme as you are suggesting would not be correct.
It appears sc8280xp is the only qcom platform using a qup prefix (even
if some older platform use a blsp equivalent), and we're not even using
it consistently as we, for example, have both
qup2_uart17, and
qup2_i2c5
(where the former should have been qup2_uart1).
So either we fix up the current labels or just drop the qup prefixes and
use a flat naming scheme (e.g. uart17 and i2c21).
Either way, there's no need for any Fixes tags as this isn't a bug.
Johan
