[PATCH v3 06/15] dt-bindings: display/msm: sc7180-dpu: Describe SM6125

[Dmitry Baryshkov]

On 19/07/2023 00:24, Marijn Suijten wrote:
> SM6125 is identical to SM6375 except that while downstream also defines
> a throttle clock, its presence results in timeouts whereas SM6375
> requires it to not observe any timeouts.  This is represented by
> reducing the clock array length to 6 so that it cannot be passed.  Note
> that any SoC other than SM6375 (currently SC7180 and SM6350) are
> unconstrained and could either pass or leave out this "throttle" clock.

Could you please describe, what kind of timeouts do you observe? Is this 
the DSI underruns issue? If so, it might be fixed by the MDSS 
interconnect fix ([1]).

[1] https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/116576/

> 
> Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh at kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten at somainline.org>
> ---
>   .../devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sc7180-dpu.yaml   | 14 ++++++++++++++
>   1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sc7180-dpu.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sc7180-dpu.yaml
> index 630b11480496..37f66940c5e3 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sc7180-dpu.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sc7180-dpu.yaml
> @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ properties:
>     compatible:
>       enum:
>         - qcom,sc7180-dpu
> +      - qcom,sm6125-dpu
>         - qcom,sm6350-dpu
>         - qcom,sm6375-dpu
>   
> @@ -73,6 +74,19 @@ allOf:
>           clock-names:
>             minItems: 7
>   
> +  - if:
> +      properties:
> +        compatible:
> +          const: qcom,sm6125-dpu
> +
> +    then:
> +      properties:
> +        clocks:
> +          maxItems: 6
> +
> +        clock-names:
> +          maxItems: 6
> +
>   examples:
>     - |
>       #include <dt-bindings/clock/qcom,dispcc-sc7180.h>
> 

-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry