>On 31/01/2023 05:38, Steev Klimaszewski wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Steev Klimaszewski <steev@xxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> .../qcom/sc8280xp-lenovo-thinkpad-x13s.dts | 68 +++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 68 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc8280xp-lenovo-thinkpad-x13s.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc8280xp-lenovo-thinkpad-x13s.dts
>> index f936b020a71d..951438ac5946 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc8280xp-lenovo-thinkpad-x13s.dts
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc8280xp-lenovo-thinkpad-x13s.dts
>> @@ -24,6 +24,8 @@ / {
>> aliases {
>> i2c4 = &i2c4;
>> i2c21 = &i2c21;
>> + serial0 = &uart17;
>> + serial1 = &uart2;
>> };
>>
>> wcd938x: audio-codec {
>> @@ -712,6 +714,32 @@ &qup0 {
>> status = "okay";
>> };
>>
>> +&uart2 {
>> + status = "okay";
>> +
>> + pinctrl-names = "default";
>> + pinctrl-0 = <&uart2_state>;
>> +
>> + bluetooth {
>> + compatible = "qcom,wcn6855-bt";
>> +
>> +/*
> Why dead code should be in the kernel?
As mentioned in the cover letter, this is a bit closer to an RFC than ready to
go in, and I do apologize that it wasn't clear enough. I do not have access to
the schematics, and based on my reading of the schema for bluetooth, these
entries are supposed to be required, however, like the wcn6750, I have dummy
data entered into the qca_soc_data_wcn6855 struct. I know that these should be
there, I just do not have access to the correct information to put, if that
makes sense?
<snip>
>Does not look like you tested the DTS against bindings. Please run `make
>dtbs_check` (see Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-schema.rst
>for instructions).
Correct I had not, but I have now, and will make the corrections test and they
will be included in v3.
>Best regards,
>Krzysztof
I appreciate the guidance for what I was doing incorrectly.
-- steev
