On Mon, Nov 04, 2024 at 12:23:57PM +0100, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> On 3.11.2024 4:37 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> > static const struct of_device_id qcom_scm_qseecom_allowlist[] __maybe_unused = {
> > - { .compatible = "dell,xps13-9345" },
> > - { .compatible = "lenovo,flex-5g" },
> > - { .compatible = "lenovo,thinkpad-t14s" },
> > - { .compatible = "lenovo,thinkpad-x13s", },
> > - { .compatible = "lenovo,yoga-slim7x" },
> > - { .compatible = "microsoft,arcata", },
> > - { .compatible = "microsoft,romulus13", },
> > - { .compatible = "microsoft,romulus15", },
> > - { .compatible = "qcom,sc8180x-primus" },
> > - { .compatible = "qcom,x1e80100-crd" },
> > - { .compatible = "qcom,x1e80100-qcp" },
> > + { .compatible = "qcom,sc8180x", .data = (void *)true },
> > + { .compatible = "qcom,sc8280xp", .data = (void *)true },
> > + { .compatible = "qcom,x1e80100", .data = (void *)true },
> > { }
> > };
>
> + Steev I think you had some unhappy machine
>
> And maybe 8180 Primus?
I have a sc8280xp crd here where variables can only be read, not stored
(e.g. similar to the Lenovo Yoga C630). In it's current configuration
the machine boots from UFS and this could possibly be related to how it
has been provisioned, but this is the reason why "qcom,sc8280xp-crd" is
not already in the above list.
Johan
