[PATCH v5 0/1] Add support for the Pine64 PinePhone Pro phone

Tom Fitzhenry posted 1 patch 1 year, 8 months ago
arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/Makefile         |   1 +
.../dts/rockchip/rk3399-pinephone-pro.dts     | 398 ++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 399 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-pinephone-pro.dts
[PATCH v5 0/1] Add support for the Pine64 PinePhone Pro phone
Posted by Tom Fitzhenry 1 year, 8 months ago
PinePhone Pro is a RK3399 based phone produced by Pine64.

Add a basic DTS for it. This is a working base that will allow myself and
others to add more nodes.

Relies on "dt-bindings: arm: rockchip: Add PinePhone Pro bindings"[0].

dtbs_check found some violations, but they were all common to the
rk3399.dtsi (and thus occurred on other RK3399 SoC DTs).

0. https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220815123004.252014-2-tom@tom-fitzhenry.me.uk/

Changes since v4:
* Add regulator vcc1v8_codec.
* Un-enable unused regulators for codec and touch.
* Fix voltage ranges on vdd_center and vccio_sd.
* Un-modify unused gpu_opp_table.

Changes since v3:
* Fix regulator min/max voltages, to align with RK3399-T datasheet.
* Re-enable cluster1_opp/opp06, with freq/volts as per RK3399-T datasheet.
* Fix gpu_opp_table voltages to align with RK3399-T datasheet.
* Change regulator names, to align with PinePhone Pro datasheet.
* Use DT Generic Names Recommendation: power -> key-power.
* Remove unused label vcc_wl on regulator.
* Fix code style.

Changes since v2:
* Used rk3399-opp.dtsi (+ disabled) rather than introdu4cing rk3399-t-opp.dtsi
* Removed superfluous comments.
* Followed DT Generic Names Recommendation
* Set 'From:' of DTS patch to be Martijn, the primary contributor to the DT.

Changes since v1:
* Simplified the DT to a minimal base.
* Introduced the RK3399-T OPPs.

Martijn Braam (1):
  arm64: dts: rockchip: Add initial support for Pine64 PinePhone Pro

 arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/Makefile         |   1 +
 .../dts/rockchip/rk3399-pinephone-pro.dts     | 398 ++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 399 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-pinephone-pro.dts


base-commit: 2e1170c71ec0c0fb785ce76fca7c682e930af2b8
prerequisite-patch-id: 41a5419f57b2712f7127d5c6cf1dbf062f6570da
-- 
2.37.1
Re: [PATCH v5 0/1] Add support for the Pine64 PinePhone Pro phone
Posted by Heiko Stuebner 1 year, 8 months ago
On Mon, 29 Aug 2022 15:00:39 +1000, Tom Fitzhenry wrote:
> PinePhone Pro is a RK3399 based phone produced by Pine64.
> 
> Add a basic DTS for it. This is a working base that will allow myself and
> others to add more nodes.
> 
> Relies on "dt-bindings: arm: rockchip: Add PinePhone Pro bindings"[0].
> 
> [...]

Applied, thanks!

[1/1] arm64: dts: rockchip: Add initial support for Pine64 PinePhone Pro
      commit: 78a21c7d59520e72ebea667fe8745a4371d9fe86


Why was the dt-binding addition missing?
I've pulled the binding from v3 now.

While it is true that you should not resend patches just to add Acks,
when re-sending a whole series that includes other changes it's still
necessary to keep all patches together ;-)


Best regards,
-- 
Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>
Re: [PATCH v5 0/1] Add support for the Pine64 PinePhone Pro phone
Posted by Tom Fitzhenry 1 year, 8 months ago
On 5/9/22 03:22, Heiko Stuebner wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Aug 2022 15:00:39 +1000, Tom Fitzhenry wrote:
>> PinePhone Pro is a RK3399 based phone produced by Pine64.
>>
>> Add a basic DTS for it. This is a working base that will allow myself and
>> others to add more nodes.
>>
>> Relies on "dt-bindings: arm: rockchip: Add PinePhone Pro bindings"[0].
>>
>> [...]
> 
> Applied, thanks!
> 
> [1/1] arm64: dts: rockchip: Add initial support for Pine64 PinePhone Pro
>        commit: 78a21c7d59520e72ebea667fe8745a4371d9fe86
> 
> 
> Why was the dt-binding addition missing?
> I've pulled the binding from v3 now.
> 
> While it is true that you should not resend patches just to add Acks,
> when re-sending a whole series that includes other changes it's still
> necessary to keep all patches together ;-)

Ah, I had misinterpreted previous advice on when it was necessary to 
repost patches.

I did wonder how maintainers would then discover the set of patches, and 
so included the "Relies on [..." text above.

I will ensure patch series are complete in future.

Thanks for your patience and review! :)