On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 02:01:09PM +0100, Konrad Dybcio wrote: > On 14.12.2022 22:09, Eric Chanudet wrote: > > Include the dtsi to use a single pmic descriptions. > > Both sa8295p-adp and sa8540p-adp have the same spmi pmic apparently. > > > > Signed-off-by: Eric Chanudet <echanude@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sa8295p-adp.dts | 79 +----------------------- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 78 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sa8295p-adp.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sa8295p-adp.dts > > index 84cb6f3eeb56..889259df3287 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sa8295p-adp.dts > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sa8295p-adp.dts > > @@ -11,6 +11,7 @@ > > #include <dt-bindings/spmi/spmi.h> > > > > #include "sa8540p.dtsi" > > +#include "pm8450a.dtsi" > I feel like naming it sa8540p-pmics.dtsi (like sc8280xp-pmics.dtsi) > would be more representative of what's really going on (unless it's > a single chip providing 4 virtual PMICs on different SIDs). I can make a v3 renaming this. The initial commit from Parikshit mentions it is to be re-used on sa8540 based boards. Side note: A quick look also shows pm8450.dtsi[1] is not included by any of its intended targets (sm8350 and sm8450 IIUC). Was this lost? Thanks, [1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220226205035.1826360-8-dmitry.baryshkov@xxxxxxxxxx -- Eric Chanudet
