.../boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma-haikou.dts | 4 ++++ arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma.dtsi | 22 +++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 26 insertions(+)
There is a PWRBTN# input pin exposed on a Q7 connector. The pin
is routed to a GPIO0_A1 through a diode. Q7 specification describes
the PWRBTN# pin as a Power Button signal.
Configure the pin as KEY_POWER, so it can function as power button and
trigger device shutdown.
Add the pin definition to RK3399 Puma dts, so it can be reused
by derived platforms, but keep it disabled by default.
Enable the power button input on Haikou development board.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Semkowicz <dse@thaumatec.com>
---
.../boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma-haikou.dts | 4 ++++
arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma.dtsi | 22 +++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 26 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma-haikou.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma-haikou.dts
index f6f15946579e..0999026b16d0 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma-haikou.dts
+++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma-haikou.dts
@@ -143,6 +143,10 @@ vddd_codec: vddd-codec {
};
};
+&gpio_key_power {
+ status = "okay";
+};
+
&hdmi {
ddc-i2c-bus = <&i2c3>;
status = "okay";
diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma.dtsi
index 650b1ba9c192..389ffe604e74 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma.dtsi
@@ -3,6 +3,7 @@
* Copyright (c) 2017 Theobroma Systems Design und Consulting GmbH
*/
+#include <dt-bindings/input/input.h>
#include <dt-bindings/pwm/pwm.h>
#include "rk3399.dtsi"
@@ -39,6 +40,19 @@ clkin_gmac: external-gmac-clock {
#clock-cells = <0>;
};
+ gpio_key_power: gpio-key-power {
+ compatible = "gpio-keys";
+ pinctrl-0 = <&pwrbtn_pin>;
+ pinctrl-names = "default";
+ status = "disabled";
+
+ button-pwrbtn-n {
+ gpios = <&gpio0 RK_PA1 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>;
+ label = "PWRBTN#";
+ linux,code = <KEY_POWER>;
+ };
+ };
+
vcc1v2_phy: vcc1v2-phy {
compatible = "regulator-fixed";
regulator-name = "vcc1v2_phy";
@@ -475,6 +489,14 @@ &pinctrl {
pinctrl-names = "default";
pinctrl-0 = <&q7_thermal_pin &bios_disable_override_hog_pin>;
+ buttons {
+ pwrbtn_pin: pwrbtn-pin {
+ rockchip,pins =
+ /* PWRBTN# */
+ <0 RK_PA1 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_up>;
+ };
+ };
+
gpios {
bios_disable_override_hog_pin: bios-disable-override-hog-pin {
rockchip,pins =
--
2.46.1Hi Daniel,
On 9/25/24 9:28 AM, Daniel Semkowicz wrote:
> There is a PWRBTN# input pin exposed on a Q7 connector. The pin
> is routed to a GPIO0_A1 through a diode. Q7 specification describes
> the PWRBTN# pin as a Power Button signal.
> Configure the pin as KEY_POWER, so it can function as power button and
> trigger device shutdown.
> Add the pin definition to RK3399 Puma dts, so it can be reused
> by derived platforms, but keep it disabled by default.
>
> Enable the power button input on Haikou development board.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Semkowicz <dse@thaumatec.com>
This works, thanks.
Tested-by: Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz@cherry.de>
Now I have some questions I wasn't able to answer myself, maybe someone
can provide some feedback on those :)
We already have a gpio-keys for buttons on Haikou, c.f.
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.11/source/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma-haikou.dts#L22.
Those signals are directly routed to the SoM and follow the Qseven standard.
The same applies to PWRBTN# signal.
However, here we have one gpio-keys for PWRBTN# in Puma DTSI and one
gpio-keys for the buttons and sliders on Haikou devkit in Haikou DTS.
I'm a bit undecided on where this should go.
Having all button/slider signals following the Qseven standard in Puma
DTSI and enable the gpio-keys only in the devkit would make sense to me,
so that other baseboards could easily make use of it. However, things
get complicated if the baseboard manufacturer decides to only implement
**some** of the signals, for which we then need to remove some nodes
from gpio-keys (and pinctrl entries) since gpio-keys doesn't check the
"status" property in its child nodes (though that could be fixed). At
which point, it's not entirely clear if having it in Puma DTSI is
actually beneficial.
Someone has an opinion/recommendation on that?
Cheers,
Quentin
> ---
>
> .../boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma-haikou.dts | 4 ++++
> arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma.dtsi | 22 +++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 26 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma-haikou.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma-haikou.dts
> index f6f15946579e..0999026b16d0 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma-haikou.dts
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma-haikou.dts
> @@ -143,6 +143,10 @@ vddd_codec: vddd-codec {
> };
> };
>
> +&gpio_key_power {
> + status = "okay";
> +};
> +
> &hdmi {
> ddc-i2c-bus = <&i2c3>;
> status = "okay";
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma.dtsi
> index 650b1ba9c192..389ffe604e74 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma.dtsi
> @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@
> * Copyright (c) 2017 Theobroma Systems Design und Consulting GmbH
> */
>
> +#include <dt-bindings/input/input.h>
> #include <dt-bindings/pwm/pwm.h>
> #include "rk3399.dtsi"
>
> @@ -39,6 +40,19 @@ clkin_gmac: external-gmac-clock {
> #clock-cells = <0>;
> };
>
> + gpio_key_power: gpio-key-power {
> + compatible = "gpio-keys";
> + pinctrl-0 = <&pwrbtn_pin>;
> + pinctrl-names = "default";
> + status = "disabled";
> +
> + button-pwrbtn-n {
> + gpios = <&gpio0 RK_PA1 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>;
> + label = "PWRBTN#";
> + linux,code = <KEY_POWER>;
> + };
> + };
> +
> vcc1v2_phy: vcc1v2-phy {
> compatible = "regulator-fixed";
> regulator-name = "vcc1v2_phy";
> @@ -475,6 +489,14 @@ &pinctrl {
> pinctrl-names = "default";
> pinctrl-0 = <&q7_thermal_pin &bios_disable_override_hog_pin>;
>
> + buttons {
> + pwrbtn_pin: pwrbtn-pin {
> + rockchip,pins =
> + /* PWRBTN# */
> + <0 RK_PA1 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_up>;
> + };
> + };
> +
> gpios {
> bios_disable_override_hog_pin: bios-disable-override-hog-pin {
> rockchip,pins =
Hey Quentin, Daniel,
Am Donnerstag, 26. September 2024, 14:34:30 CEST schrieb Quentin Schulz:
> On 9/25/24 9:28 AM, Daniel Semkowicz wrote:
> > There is a PWRBTN# input pin exposed on a Q7 connector. The pin
> > is routed to a GPIO0_A1 through a diode. Q7 specification describes
> > the PWRBTN# pin as a Power Button signal.
> > Configure the pin as KEY_POWER, so it can function as power button and
> > trigger device shutdown.
> > Add the pin definition to RK3399 Puma dts, so it can be reused
> > by derived platforms, but keep it disabled by default.
> >
> > Enable the power button input on Haikou development board.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Semkowicz <dse@thaumatec.com>
>
> This works, thanks.
>
> Tested-by: Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz@cherry.de>
>
> Now I have some questions I wasn't able to answer myself, maybe someone
> can provide some feedback on those :)
>
> We already have a gpio-keys for buttons on Haikou, c.f.
> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.11/source/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma-haikou.dts#L22.
> Those signals are directly routed to the SoM and follow the Qseven standard.
>
> The same applies to PWRBTN# signal.
>
> However, here we have one gpio-keys for PWRBTN# in Puma DTSI and one
> gpio-keys for the buttons and sliders on Haikou devkit in Haikou DTS.
>
> I'm a bit undecided on where this should go.
>
> Having all button/slider signals following the Qseven standard in Puma
> DTSI and enable the gpio-keys only in the devkit would make sense to me,
> so that other baseboards could easily make use of it. However, things
> get complicated if the baseboard manufacturer decides to only implement
> **some** of the signals, for which we then need to remove some nodes
> from gpio-keys (and pinctrl entries) since gpio-keys doesn't check the
> "status" property in its child nodes (though that could be fixed). At
> which point, it's not entirely clear if having it in Puma DTSI is
> actually beneficial.
>
> Someone has an opinion/recommendation on that?
I guess from a platform perspective nobody really cares, so as that is
"your" board, it comes down to a policy decision on your part ;-) .
While pins follow the q7 standard, there may very well be some lax
handling of that standard in some places, and I guess gpio lines could
be re-used for something else if needed, as something like the lid-switch
is probably non-essential.
Also a gpio-key input does not create that much code-overhead if
replicated, so personally I'd just stick the power-button with the other
buttons in the haikou dts.
Which is also a way better thing than having multiple gpio-keys instances
that userspace then has to handle.
Heiko
> > ---
> >
> > .../boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma-haikou.dts | 4 ++++
> > arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma.dtsi | 22 +++++++++++++++++++
> > 2 files changed, 26 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma-haikou.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma-haikou.dts
> > index f6f15946579e..0999026b16d0 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma-haikou.dts
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma-haikou.dts
> > @@ -143,6 +143,10 @@ vddd_codec: vddd-codec {
> > };
> > };
> >
> > +&gpio_key_power {
> > + status = "okay";
> > +};
> > +
> > &hdmi {
> > ddc-i2c-bus = <&i2c3>;
> > status = "okay";
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma.dtsi
> > index 650b1ba9c192..389ffe604e74 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma.dtsi
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma.dtsi
> > @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@
> > * Copyright (c) 2017 Theobroma Systems Design und Consulting GmbH
> > */
> >
> > +#include <dt-bindings/input/input.h>
> > #include <dt-bindings/pwm/pwm.h>
> > #include "rk3399.dtsi"
> >
> > @@ -39,6 +40,19 @@ clkin_gmac: external-gmac-clock {
> > #clock-cells = <0>;
> > };
> >
> > + gpio_key_power: gpio-key-power {
> > + compatible = "gpio-keys";
> > + pinctrl-0 = <&pwrbtn_pin>;
> > + pinctrl-names = "default";
> > + status = "disabled";
> > +
> > + button-pwrbtn-n {
> > + gpios = <&gpio0 RK_PA1 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>;
> > + label = "PWRBTN#";
> > + linux,code = <KEY_POWER>;
> > + };
> > + };
> > +
> > vcc1v2_phy: vcc1v2-phy {
> > compatible = "regulator-fixed";
> > regulator-name = "vcc1v2_phy";
> > @@ -475,6 +489,14 @@ &pinctrl {
> > pinctrl-names = "default";
> > pinctrl-0 = <&q7_thermal_pin &bios_disable_override_hog_pin>;
> >
> > + buttons {
> > + pwrbtn_pin: pwrbtn-pin {
> > + rockchip,pins =
> > + /* PWRBTN# */
> > + <0 RK_PA1 RK_FUNC_GPIO &pcfg_pull_up>;
> > + };
> > + };
> > +
> > gpios {
> > bios_disable_override_hog_pin: bios-disable-override-hog-pin {
> > rockchip,pins =
>
>
Hi Heiko,
On 9/30/24 10:49 AM, Heiko Stübner wrote:
> Hey Quentin, Daniel,
>
> Am Donnerstag, 26. September 2024, 14:34:30 CEST schrieb Quentin Schulz:
>> On 9/25/24 9:28 AM, Daniel Semkowicz wrote:
>>> There is a PWRBTN# input pin exposed on a Q7 connector. The pin
>>> is routed to a GPIO0_A1 through a diode. Q7 specification describes
>>> the PWRBTN# pin as a Power Button signal.
>>> Configure the pin as KEY_POWER, so it can function as power button and
>>> trigger device shutdown.
>>> Add the pin definition to RK3399 Puma dts, so it can be reused
>>> by derived platforms, but keep it disabled by default.
>>>
>>> Enable the power button input on Haikou development board.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Semkowicz <dse@thaumatec.com>
>>
>> This works, thanks.
>>
>> Tested-by: Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz@cherry.de>
>>
>> Now I have some questions I wasn't able to answer myself, maybe someone
>> can provide some feedback on those :)
>>
>> We already have a gpio-keys for buttons on Haikou, c.f.
>> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.11/source/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma-haikou.dts#L22.
>> Those signals are directly routed to the SoM and follow the Qseven standard.
>>
>> The same applies to PWRBTN# signal.
>>
>> However, here we have one gpio-keys for PWRBTN# in Puma DTSI and one
>> gpio-keys for the buttons and sliders on Haikou devkit in Haikou DTS.
>>
>> I'm a bit undecided on where this should go.
>>
>> Having all button/slider signals following the Qseven standard in Puma
>> DTSI and enable the gpio-keys only in the devkit would make sense to me,
>> so that other baseboards could easily make use of it. However, things
>> get complicated if the baseboard manufacturer decides to only implement
>> **some** of the signals, for which we then need to remove some nodes
>> from gpio-keys (and pinctrl entries) since gpio-keys doesn't check the
>> "status" property in its child nodes (though that could be fixed). At
>> which point, it's not entirely clear if having it in Puma DTSI is
>> actually beneficial.
>>
>> Someone has an opinion/recommendation on that?
>
> I guess from a platform perspective nobody really cares, so as that is
> "your" board, it comes down to a policy decision on your part ;-) .
>
> While pins follow the q7 standard, there may very well be some lax
> handling of that standard in some places, and I guess gpio lines could
> be re-used for something else if needed, as something like the lid-switch
> is probably non-essential.
>
> Also a gpio-key input does not create that much code-overhead if
> replicated, so personally I'd just stick the power-button with the other
> buttons in the haikou dts.
>
> Which is also a way better thing than having multiple gpio-keys instances
> that userspace then has to handle.
>
Yes, but this also means "code" duplication for whoever needs this for
their baseboard, instead of just having to add a &gpio_keys { status =
"okay"; }.
I don't think there's a good solution here, so I would suggest we go
with everything in Haikou's gpio-keys as Heiko suggested then, @Daniel
if you agree can you send a v2 for that?
Thanks!
Quentin
Am Montag, 30. September 2024, 11:11:56 CEST schrieb Quentin Schulz:
> Hi Heiko,
>
> On 9/30/24 10:49 AM, Heiko Stübner wrote:
> > Hey Quentin, Daniel,
> >
> > Am Donnerstag, 26. September 2024, 14:34:30 CEST schrieb Quentin Schulz:
> >> On 9/25/24 9:28 AM, Daniel Semkowicz wrote:
> >>> There is a PWRBTN# input pin exposed on a Q7 connector. The pin
> >>> is routed to a GPIO0_A1 through a diode. Q7 specification describes
> >>> the PWRBTN# pin as a Power Button signal.
> >>> Configure the pin as KEY_POWER, so it can function as power button and
> >>> trigger device shutdown.
> >>> Add the pin definition to RK3399 Puma dts, so it can be reused
> >>> by derived platforms, but keep it disabled by default.
> >>>
> >>> Enable the power button input on Haikou development board.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Semkowicz <dse@thaumatec.com>
> >>
> >> This works, thanks.
> >>
> >> Tested-by: Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz@cherry.de>
> >>
> >> Now I have some questions I wasn't able to answer myself, maybe someone
> >> can provide some feedback on those :)
> >>
> >> We already have a gpio-keys for buttons on Haikou, c.f.
> >> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.11/source/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma-haikou.dts#L22.
> >> Those signals are directly routed to the SoM and follow the Qseven standard.
> >>
> >> The same applies to PWRBTN# signal.
> >>
> >> However, here we have one gpio-keys for PWRBTN# in Puma DTSI and one
> >> gpio-keys for the buttons and sliders on Haikou devkit in Haikou DTS.
> >>
> >> I'm a bit undecided on where this should go.
> >>
> >> Having all button/slider signals following the Qseven standard in Puma
> >> DTSI and enable the gpio-keys only in the devkit would make sense to me,
> >> so that other baseboards could easily make use of it. However, things
> >> get complicated if the baseboard manufacturer decides to only implement
> >> **some** of the signals, for which we then need to remove some nodes
> >> from gpio-keys (and pinctrl entries) since gpio-keys doesn't check the
> >> "status" property in its child nodes (though that could be fixed). At
> >> which point, it's not entirely clear if having it in Puma DTSI is
> >> actually beneficial.
> >>
> >> Someone has an opinion/recommendation on that?
> >
> > I guess from a platform perspective nobody really cares, so as that is
> > "your" board, it comes down to a policy decision on your part ;-) .
> >
> > While pins follow the q7 standard, there may very well be some lax
> > handling of that standard in some places, and I guess gpio lines could
> > be re-used for something else if needed, as something like the lid-switch
> > is probably non-essential.
> >
> > Also a gpio-key input does not create that much code-overhead if
> > replicated, so personally I'd just stick the power-button with the other
> > buttons in the haikou dts.
> >
> > Which is also a way better thing than having multiple gpio-keys instances
> > that userspace then has to handle.
> >
>
> Yes, but this also means "code" duplication for whoever needs this for
> their baseboard, instead of just having to add a &gpio_keys { status =
> "okay"; }.
Yes :-) .
gpio-keys is special in a way in that you could end up with a different set
of enabled keys per baseboard - dependent on how closely it follows the
standard.
So if someone repurposed the lid-switch only, you'd start changing the
core node again. Hence for the gpio-keys it's probably easier to define
the set of keys in the baseboard.
It's of course different for regulator-infrastructure and such.
> I don't think there's a good solution here, so I would suggest we go
> with everything in Haikou's gpio-keys as Heiko suggested then, @Daniel
> if you agree can you send a v2 for that?
I'll wait for v2 then.
Heiko
On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 11:21 AM Heiko Stübner <heiko@sntech.de> wrote:
>
> Am Montag, 30. September 2024, 11:11:56 CEST schrieb Quentin Schulz:
> > Hi Heiko,
> >
> > On 9/30/24 10:49 AM, Heiko Stübner wrote:
> > > Hey Quentin, Daniel,
> > >
Hello Heiko, Hello Quentin,
> > > Am Donnerstag, 26. September 2024, 14:34:30 CEST schrieb Quentin Schulz:
> > >> On 9/25/24 9:28 AM, Daniel Semkowicz wrote:
> > >>> There is a PWRBTN# input pin exposed on a Q7 connector. The pin
> > >>> is routed to a GPIO0_A1 through a diode. Q7 specification describes
> > >>> the PWRBTN# pin as a Power Button signal.
> > >>> Configure the pin as KEY_POWER, so it can function as power button and
> > >>> trigger device shutdown.
> > >>> Add the pin definition to RK3399 Puma dts, so it can be reused
> > >>> by derived platforms, but keep it disabled by default.
> > >>>
> > >>> Enable the power button input on Haikou development board.
> > >>>
> > >>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Semkowicz <dse@thaumatec.com>
> > >>
> > >> This works, thanks.
> > >>
> > >> Tested-by: Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz@cherry.de>
> > >>
> > >> Now I have some questions I wasn't able to answer myself, maybe someone
> > >> can provide some feedback on those :)
> > >>
> > >> We already have a gpio-keys for buttons on Haikou, c.f.
> > >> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.11/source/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-puma-haikou.dts#L22.
> > >> Those signals are directly routed to the SoM and follow the Qseven standard.
> > >>
> > >> The same applies to PWRBTN# signal.
> > >>
> > >> However, here we have one gpio-keys for PWRBTN# in Puma DTSI and one
> > >> gpio-keys for the buttons and sliders on Haikou devkit in Haikou DTS.
> > >>
> > >> I'm a bit undecided on where this should go.
> > >>
> > >> Having all button/slider signals following the Qseven standard in Puma
> > >> DTSI and enable the gpio-keys only in the devkit would make sense to me,
> > >> so that other baseboards could easily make use of it. However, things
> > >> get complicated if the baseboard manufacturer decides to only implement
> > >> **some** of the signals, for which we then need to remove some nodes
> > >> from gpio-keys (and pinctrl entries) since gpio-keys doesn't check the
> > >> "status" property in its child nodes (though that could be fixed). At
> > >> which point, it's not entirely clear if having it in Puma DTSI is
> > >> actually beneficial.
> > >>
> > >> Someone has an opinion/recommendation on that?
> > >
> > > I guess from a platform perspective nobody really cares, so as that is
> > > "your" board, it comes down to a policy decision on your part ;-) .
> > >
> > > While pins follow the q7 standard, there may very well be some lax
> > > handling of that standard in some places, and I guess gpio lines could
> > > be re-used for something else if needed, as something like the lid-switch
> > > is probably non-essential.
> > >
> > > Also a gpio-key input does not create that much code-overhead if
> > > replicated, so personally I'd just stick the power-button with the other
> > > buttons in the haikou dts.
> > >
> > > Which is also a way better thing than having multiple gpio-keys instances
> > > that userspace then has to handle.
> > >
> >
> > Yes, but this also means "code" duplication for whoever needs this for
> > their baseboard, instead of just having to add a &gpio_keys { status =
> > "okay"; }.
>
> Yes :-) .
>
> gpio-keys is special in a way in that you could end up with a different set
> of enabled keys per baseboard - dependent on how closely it follows the
> standard.
>
> So if someone repurposed the lid-switch only, you'd start changing the
> core node again. Hence for the gpio-keys it's probably easier to define
> the set of keys in the baseboard.
>
> It's of course different for regulator-infrastructure and such.
>
> > I don't think there's a good solution here, so I would suggest we go
> > with everything in Haikou's gpio-keys as Heiko suggested then, @Daniel
> > if you agree can you send a v2 for that?
I'm fine with that. I will prepare v2 with such change.
>
> I'll wait for v2 then.
>
> Heiko
>
>
Kind regards
Daniel
© 2016 - 2024 Red Hat, Inc.