The QCS615 platform is based on the SM6150 SoC. Since the DP hardware is
shared with SM6150, the compatible string qcom,sm6150-dp is used to
represent the DP controller on QCS615.

Signed-off-by: Xiangxu Yin <xiangxu.yin@oss.qualcomm.com>
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/dp-controller.yaml | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/dp-controller.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/dp-controller.yaml
index 9923b065323bbab99de5079b674a0317f3074373..996d0132e084d401db85014a1a4e445d00d62ed8 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/dp-controller.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/dp-controller.yaml
@@ -27,6 +27,7 @@ properties:
           - qcom,sc8280xp-dp
           - qcom,sc8280xp-edp
           - qcom,sdm845-dp
+          - qcom,sm6150-dp
           - qcom,sm8350-dp
           - qcom,sm8650-dp
       - items:

-- 
2.34.1

On 22/07/2025 09:22, Xiangxu Yin wrote:
> The QCS615 platform is based on the SM6150 SoC. Since the DP hardware is
> shared with SM6150, the compatible string qcom,sm6150-dp is used to
> represent the DP controller on QCS615.


No, you cannot use other SoC compatible for different one. Look at
qcs615.dtsi and board DTS - there is nothing saying that this is the
same die.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

On 22/07/2025 12:13, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 22/07/2025 09:22, Xiangxu Yin wrote:
>> The QCS615 platform is based on the SM6150 SoC. Since the DP hardware is
>> shared with SM6150, the compatible string qcom,sm6150-dp is used to
>> represent the DP controller on QCS615.
> 
> 
> No, you cannot use other SoC compatible for different one. Look at
> qcs615.dtsi and board DTS - there is nothing saying that this is the
> same die.

Please take another look, we even have renamed qcs615.dtsi to sm6150.dtsi

-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry

On 22/07/2025 11:16, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On 22/07/2025 12:13, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 22/07/2025 09:22, Xiangxu Yin wrote:
>>> The QCS615 platform is based on the SM6150 SoC. Since the DP hardware is
>>> shared with SM6150, the compatible string qcom,sm6150-dp is used to
>>> represent the DP controller on QCS615.
>>
>>
>> No, you cannot use other SoC compatible for different one. Look at
>> qcs615.dtsi and board DTS - there is nothing saying that this is the
>> same die.
> 
> Please take another look, we even have renamed qcs615.dtsi to sm6150.dtsi

I checked on recent next, although not latest next-20250716. Commit msg
should explain that. Any qcs615 feel then inappropriate here.

Subject says clearly "on QCS615". Patch does something completely else!

For gods sake how anyone can understand this?

Best regards,
Krzysztof

On 7/22/2025 5:23 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 22/07/2025 11:16, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>> On 22/07/2025 12:13, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 22/07/2025 09:22, Xiangxu Yin wrote:
>>>> The QCS615 platform is based on the SM6150 SoC. Since the DP hardware is
>>>> shared with SM6150, the compatible string qcom,sm6150-dp is used to
>>>> represent the DP controller on QCS615.
>>>
>>> No, you cannot use other SoC compatible for different one. Look at
>>> qcs615.dtsi and board DTS - there is nothing saying that this is the
>>> same die.
>> Please take another look, we even have renamed qcs615.dtsi to sm6150.dtsi
> I checked on recent next, although not latest next-20250716. Commit msg
> should explain that. Any qcs615 feel then inappropriate here.
>
> Subject says clearly "on QCS615". Patch does something completely else!
>
> For gods sake how anyone can understand this?
Sorry，I’ve verified full functionality with the DTSI on the 7/15 linux-next version, and also checked patch conflicts and checkpatch issues against the 7/22 version.

Based on your comments, I noticed that the DTSI rename from qcs615.dtsi to sm6150.dtsi was already merged on 7/16:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250604-qcs615-sm6150-v1-0-2f01fd46c365@oss.qualcomm.com/

I’ll update all related descriptions for qcs615 and sm6150 in the next patch version, and reverify full functionality with the latest linux-next image.

Thanks again for pointing this out.
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof