On Mon, Oct 27, 2025 at 03:29:40PM +0200, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 27, 2025 at 02:20:26PM +0100, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> > On 10/27/25 2:14 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 24, 2025 at 11:27:53AM +0800, yuanjiey wrote:
> > >> On Thu, Oct 23, 2025 at 02:02:45PM +0200, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> > >>> On 10/23/25 1:48 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> > >>>> On Thu, Oct 23, 2025 at 03:53:50PM +0800, yuanjie yang wrote:
> > >>>>> From: Yuanjie Yang <[email protected]>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Add DSI PHY support for the Kaanapali platform.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Signed-off-by: Yongxing Mou <[email protected]>
> > >>>>> Signed-off-by: Yuanjie Yang <[email protected]>
> > >>>>> ---
> > >>>
> > >>> [...]
> > >>>
> > >>>>> + .io_start = { 0x9ac1000, 0xae97000 },
> > >>>>
> > >>>> These two addresses are very strange. Would you care to explain? Other
> > >>>> than that there is no difference from SM8750 entry.
> > >>>
> > >>> They're correct.
> > >>> Although they correspond to DSI_0 and DSI_2..
> > >>>
> > >>> Yuanjie, none of the DSI patches mention that v2.10.0 is packed with
> > >>> new features. Please provide some more context and how that impacts
> > >>> the hw description.
> > >>
> > >> Thanks for your reminder.
> > >>
> > >> Correct here:
> > >> io_start = { 0x9ac1000, 0x9ac4000 } DSI_Phy0 DSI_phy1
> > >>
> > >> And v2.10.0 no clearly meaningful changes compared to v2.9.0.
> > >> just some register address change.
> > >
> > > Addition of DSI2 is a meaningful change, which needs to be handled both
> > > in the core and in the DSI / DSI PHY drivers.
> >
> > DSI2 was introduced in 8750 already, but it was done without any
> > fanfare..
> >
> > I see a diagram that shows an XBAR with inputs from DSI0 and DSI2,
> > and an output to DSI0_PHY (same thing on kaanapali - meaning this
> > patch is potentially wrong and should ref DSI1_PHY instead?)
>
Yes, I check ipcata Doc, I see DSI0\DSI0_PHY DSI1\DSI1_PHY DSI2\DSI2_PHY in
Kaanapali,
addition of DSI2\DSI2_PHY compared to SM8650.
look like I should add: config io_start = {DSI0_PHY, DSI1_PHY, DSI2_PHY},
Do you thinks this fix is OK?
Thanks,
Yuanjie
> Most likely.
>
> --
> With best wishes
> Dmitry
