There are two variants of Xiaomi Poco F1.
- Tianma variant with NOVATEK NT36672A panel + touchscreen manufactured
  by Tianma
- EBBG variant with Focaltech FT8719 panel + touchscreen manufactured
  by EBBG

The current sdm845-xiaomi-beryllium.dts represents Tianma panel variant.

To add support for the EBBG variant, let's
- Rename sdm845-xiaomi-beryllium.dts to sdm845-xiaomi-beryllium-tianma.dts
to be more specific.
- Move the common nodes from tianma variant into a new common dtsi.
- Create sdm845-xiaomi-beryllium-ebbg.dts for the EBBG variant.

Note:
-----
Both the panels are already upstreamed and the split is based on them.
There were patches earlier for both the touchscreens, but they are not
accepted in upstream yet. Once they are accepted, we will add them to
respective variants.

Joel Selvaraj (3):
  arm64: dts: qcom: sdm845-xiaomi-beryllium: rename to
    sdm845-xiaomi-beryllium-tianma.dts
  arm64: dts: qcom: sdm845-xiaomi-beryllium-common: move common nodes to
    a common dtsi
  arm64: dts: qcom: sdm845-xiaomi-beryllium-ebbg: introduce Xiaomi Poco
    F1 EBBG variant

 arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/Makefile                      |  3 ++-
 ...ryllium.dts => sdm845-xiaomi-beryllium-common.dtsi} |  9 +++++----
 .../boot/dts/qcom/sdm845-xiaomi-beryllium-ebbg.dts     | 10 ++++++++++
 .../boot/dts/qcom/sdm845-xiaomi-beryllium-tianma.dts   | 10 ++++++++++
 4 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
 rename arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/{sdm845-xiaomi-beryllium.dts => sdm845-xiaomi-beryllium-common.dtsi} (98%)
 create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845-xiaomi-beryllium-ebbg.dts
 create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845-xiaomi-beryllium-tianma.dts

-- 
2.37.1

To be honest, I have no idea why my patch series doesn't get linked
properly. I think there is some issue in my OS. I use git format-patch
and git send-mail to send patches. It used to work fine. But it doesn't
want to work anymore :/ Is there a mailing list for sending test mails?
or how do I debug this? Kindly let me know if anyone has any
suggestions. Also, Do I need to resend this patch series?

Regards,
Joel Selvaraj

Hi,

On Mon, 1 Aug 2022 at 14:44, Joel Selvaraj <joel.selvaraj@outlook.com> wrote:
>
> To be honest, I have no idea why my patch series doesn't get linked
> properly. I think there is some issue in my OS. I use git format-patch
> and git send-mail to send patches. It used to work fine. But it doesn't
> want to work anymore :/ Is there a mailing list for sending test mails?
> or how do I debug this? Kindly let me know if anyone has any
> suggestions.

Judging from the following headers, it's not your OS, it is M$
rewriting the headers.

Message-ID: <BY5PR02MB70099020AC1D181D15909F64EA9A9@BY5PR02MB7009.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
X-Microsoft-Original-Message-ID:
<20220801112512.209047-1-joel.selvaraj@outlook.com>

According to some mentions on the Internet, M$ relies on headers
rewriting and will not change this behaviour.

I'd suggest switching to another SMTP submission host. I think it
should be e.g. possible to tell GMail to send mails with @outlook.com
addresses. However this might confuse some of the mail clients into
believing it is spam since the email will SOFTFAIL the SPF check.

Switching to another mail provider might be an option too.

-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry

Hi Dmitry Baryshkov

On 01/08/22 20:30, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Mon, 1 Aug 2022 at 14:44, Joel Selvaraj <joel.selvaraj@outlook.com> wrote:
>>
>> To be honest, I have no idea why my patch series doesn't get linked
>> properly. I think there is some issue in my OS. I use git format-patch
>> and git send-mail to send patches. It used to work fine. But it doesn't
>> want to work anymore :/ Is there a mailing list for sending test mails?
>> or how do I debug this? Kindly let me know if anyone has any
>> suggestions.
> 
> Judging from the following headers, it's not your OS, it is M$
> rewriting the headers.
> 
> Message-ID: <BY5PR02MB70099020AC1D181D15909F64EA9A9@BY5PR02MB7009.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
> X-Microsoft-Original-Message-ID:
> <20220801112512.209047-1-joel.selvaraj@outlook.com>
> 
> According to some mentions on the Internet, M$ relies on headers
> rewriting and will not change this behaviour.
> 
> I'd suggest switching to another SMTP submission host. I think it
> should be e.g. possible to tell GMail to send mails with @outlook.com
> addresses. However this might confuse some of the mail clients into
> believing it is spam since the email will SOFTFAIL the SPF check.
> 
> Switching to another mail provider might be an option too.

Thanks for the suggestion. Plan to switch the mail provider for the next
patch. Hope it goes well.

Best Regards,
Joel Selvaraj