Hi David,
Did you boot-test this?
On 30/12/2023 00:18, David Heidelberg wrote:
On 29/12/2023 22:37, Luca Weiss wrote:
On Freitag, 29. Dezember 2023 21:29:54 CET David Heidelberg wrote:
Reported by: `make CHECK_DTBS=1 qcom/sdm845-oneplus-enchilada.dtb`
Signed-off-by: David Heidelberg <david@xxxxxxx>
---
arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi
b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi index c2244824355a..ad8677b62bfb
100644
--- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi
@@ -2644,6 +2644,8 @@ ufs_mem_phy: phy@1d87000 {
clocks = <&gcc GCC_UFS_MEM_CLKREF_CLK>,
<&gcc GCC_UFS_PHY_PHY_AUX_CLK>;
+ power-domains = <&gcc UFS_PHY_GDSC>;
+
resets = <&ufs_mem_hc 0>;
reset-names = "ufsphy";
This is potentially the wrong power domain, see the conversation here:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20231204172829.GA69580@thinkpad/
Thanks, I was thinking about SDM845_MX, but then looked at rest more
closer qcom archs and thought it'll be likely GDSC (also by looking at
ufs_mem_hc reset vectors).
Hopefully Mani can give some input here :)
Regards
Luca
--
// Caleb (they/them)
