From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=5.75.144.95 ARC-Seal: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; t=1793650322; b=eGsuBrocQQQvrl+Ql8hG+82iI6LdSFB6JCQHwULqI0wVGYYZrP9TeH4s71GkOTgfZGOQ s3wQ3ROmxoPlebVtU9QeaorYPUUM4eYjARaDwt7C4xxvpLrwecGj5G+1drb+oeWTEy9PI za5mSwaSGkk4ZrEGzLPmATwN8fFN2HqBVuo+0TF9oAP4wdCTcilOL7ePb3RCI4I3N3IB5 3UWofdKZC0iGuzacN+supKHR9uQyBU1tl6Vi14hLajzhEvmFk+nFBNHbf+UiWju7vkl7C aQ9R5rPMj79rl56rBmaMOWcnfh2Tk4vbF0NorWBR/3g2QyrJUnS4JEWu0T4+91hA2bA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1793650322; h=DMARC-Filter:DKIM-Signature:DKIM-Signature:MIME-Version:Date:From:To: Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Message-ID:X-Sender:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding; bh=ooVkNjORrZgSba8ld1qrv4TAWTmp+Mq4v6vJgAJRcuY=; b=hyJy/RUd6j9xcopuT9LY2wgRW4HtDTvwG7q+7rpuhNNx19LFKjEXm7O4QOdea9CFfzy2 jdByxslgjHuashOfXU3z9gRt8+yOO+EovMjIXYmfuF508Wfh5Aw67mxLLVTOeQIiup5oV RtAV2vAXfZNypYy/iu52J2hSy8DUFjoq8Mm258PSGVhRFdP1+AIGtPUR2wLsMhrey1ZfA E6ssw/qOCvQFkyVS3C/6yA3KZ+Q0cf4VnKAySYcpzI5Au6G1Zgc7DNd8RVvhaGWal7Dau jm45iTHTcGMBB5yEgmzrjacWGuNKT88X7H4M+AFOheIJaZsJqLywxZcdYlO4VygR71A== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass header.from=mainlining.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=mainlining.org; dkim=pass header.d=mainlining.org header.i=@mainlining.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=202507r header.b=J5uuMyvB; dkim=pass header.d=mainlining.org header.i=@mainlining.org header.a=ed25519-sha256 header.s=202507e header.b=DlvNQeXY; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=5.75.144.95 Received: from mail.mainlining.org (mail.mainlining.org [5.75.144.95]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1FD50606A330; Mon, 2 Nov 2026 20:12:00 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 smtp.subspace.kernel.org 1FD50606A330 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=mainlining.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=mainlining.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=mainlining.org header.i=@mainlining.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=202507r header.b=J5uuMyvB; dkim=pass header.d=mainlining.org header.i=@mainlining.org header.a=ed25519-sha256 header.s=202507e header.b=DlvNQeXY DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=202507r; d=mainlining.org; c=relaxed/relaxed; h=Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date; t=1793650293; bh=ooVkNjORrZgSba8ld1qrv4T AWTmp+Mq4v6vJgAJRcuY=; b=J5uuMyvB0j8+fnnIEA5+blJO0xOjNA6dhLpOwpclL9kJpaC0Tm 8LK8Udvpnr0wv8evtfO5mH+HUCfb4ZwEqdyEUWw7mFP24R3pGwm59KRAIgDy9QRAOb2mnukLywL 0660CA6K7wEYBRdCGYj0C4cNgJeqSRXyfo9MdgW1cxFHD4r0ssTTGfVFu4XWh9CYRcKzoHIy7AS C2J7EP8gep42piUJmtZHEmNBU6rVHAD43SFsjSE6pROOJmAwbYSSMakMl1VlQG83PIKuljNL3KP dDZSbc1Pl7aKJWjehAM35wqwK40Vie0bdq+GdKfhAw1VEFr1xAZf7iaQaMuUbeQQxsQ==; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; s=202507e; d=mainlining.org; c=relaxed/relaxed; h=Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date; t=1793650293; bh=ooVkNjORrZgSba8ld1qrv4T AWTmp+Mq4v6vJgAJRcuY=; b=DlvNQeXYdySbukhI3ezy0aeC1O7mihjZhRE+/kthxIG0im6cUY RI9/hdW99mOi/rtxxbS6OcWbNWPcQIfH5XAg==; X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: List-Owner: Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2026 21:11:33 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?Q?Barnab=C3=A1s_Cz=C3=A9m=C3=A1n?= To: Konrad Dybcio Cc: Amir Hanip , abelvesa@kernel.org, andersson@kernel.org, conor+dt@kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, konradybcio@kernel.org, krzk+dt@kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, robh@kernel.org, a39skl@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] arm64: dts: qcom: Add Xiaomi Poco M3 In-Reply-To: References: <239d46726c0aad84feccc3def4eafab2@mainlining.org> <20261101164930.17976-1-killdeath104@gmail.com> <9304e75396496855881251cac2edb0a5@mainlining.org> Message-ID: <3ec43b1b00bca7506c1ca678c118f8c2@mainlining.org> X-Sender: barnabas.czeman@mainlining.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 2026-11-02 11:44, Konrad Dybcio wrote: > On 11/1/26 8:44 PM, Barnabás Czémán wrote: >> On 2026-11-01 17:49, Amir Hanip wrote: >>> On Fri, 30 Oct 2026 13:30:28 +0100, Barnabas Czeman wrote: >>>> Poco M3 (citrus) is same HW like Redmi 9T (lime) and Remi 9T NFC >>>> (lemon) basically is a lime with NFC. >>>> So i think it would be better make a common base from lemon's >>>> devicetree instead of making the same devicetree again for the >>>> different variants where only the compatible and the model property >>>> will be the difference. >>>> Check sm6115-xiaomi-gingkgo-common for example, it was the same case >>>> for Redmi Note 8 (ginkgo) and 8T (willow). >>> >>> Hi Barnabas, Adam, >>> >>> Thanks for the review, that makes sense. I am preparing a v3 that >>> moves the shared parts of lemon into sm6115-xiaomi-lime-common.dtsi >>> and has both lemon and citrus include it. I used the name lime-common >>> following your naming. Happy to rename it. >>> >>> Plan for v3: >>> 1. dt-bindings (unchanged) >>> 2. lemon: move the shared nodes into the common dtsi, no functional >>>    change intended >>> 3. citrus on top of the common dtsi >>> >>> I can only test citrus. I do not own a Redmi 9T, so lemon is untested >>> on hardware. Instead, I compared the lemon DTS before and after the >>> split, normalized with dtc (dtc -I dts -O dts -s). The only >>> difference is the numbering of two auto-generated phandles. I will >>> describe the check in the cover letter. Adam, >>> would you be able to test lemon once v3 is posted, or look at the >>> split beforehand? >>> >>> The IPA carve-outs (pil_ipa_fw_mem and pil_ipa_gsi_mem) are identical >>> on both, so they now live in the common dtsi. >>> >>> I kept the following per variant because I cannot tell whether they >>> are real hardware differences or just differences between the stock >>> firmware images: >>> >>> - ADSP carve-out: 0x53800000/0x2200000 on citrus, >>> 0x53400000/0x2600000 >>>   on lemon. Both regions end at 0x55a00000, so only the start and >>>   size differ. I can only confirm that the citrus value works on my >>>   device. >> If there are no overlaps the bigger range could work for both of them. > > Waste of precious RAM! I have checked it seems lemon have same adsp region like citrus. `pil_adsp_region@53800000` > > Konrad