Hi David, On Sat, May 23, 2026 at 11:45:35AM +0200, David Heidelberg via B4 Relay wrote: > From: David Heidelberg <[email protected]> > > We know the driver is reporting s3706b, introduce the compatible so we > can more easily introduce quirks for weird touchscreen replacements in > followup series. > > Reviewed-by: Konrad Dybcio <[email protected]> > Signed-off-by: David Heidelberg <[email protected]> > --- > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845-oneplus-common.dtsi | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845-oneplus-common.dtsi > b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845-oneplus-common.dtsi > index 6b7378cf4d493..148164d456a5a 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845-oneplus-common.dtsi > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845-oneplus-common.dtsi > @@ -475,17 +475,17 @@ bq27441_fg: bq27441-battery@55 { > }; > }; > > &i2c12 { > status = "okay"; > clock-frequency = <400000>; > > synaptics-rmi4-i2c@20 { > - compatible = "syna,rmi4-i2c"; > + compatible = "syna,rmi4-s3706b", "syna,rmi4-i2c";
So I believe we established that this device (s3706b) does not in fact implement rmi4 protocol properly. Why do we have "syna,rmi4-i2c" as a fallback? Shouldn't it be just "syna,rmi4-s3706b"? Thanks. -- Dmitry
