[PATCH] ARM: dts: imx6q-dhcom: Add PU,VDD1P1,VDD2P5 regulators

[PATCH] ARM: dts: imx6q-dhcom: Add PU,VDD1P1,VDD2P5 regulators

[Marek Vasut]

Per schematic, both PU and SOC regulator are supplied from LTC3676 SW1
via VDDSOC_IN rail, add the PU input. Both VDD1P1, VDD2P5 are supplied
from LTC3676 SW2 via VDDHIGH_IN rail, add both inputs.

Fixes: 52c7a088badd ("ARM: dts: imx6q: Add support for the DHCOM iMX6 SoM and PDK2")
Cc: Christoph Niedermaier <cniedermaier@dh-electronics.com>
Cc: Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com>
Cc: Ludwig Zenz <lzenz@dh-electronics.com>
Cc: NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@nxp.com>
Cc: Shawn Guo <shawnguo@kernel.org>
---
 arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q-dhcom-som.dtsi | 12 ++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)

diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q-dhcom-som.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q-dhcom-som.dtsi
index 236fc205c389..d0768ae429fa 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q-dhcom-som.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q-dhcom-som.dtsi
@@ -406,6 +406,18 @@ &reg_soc {
 	vin-supply = <&sw1_reg>;
 };
 
+&reg_pu {
+	vin-supply = <&sw1_reg>;
+};
+
+&reg_vdd1p1 {
+	vin-supply = <&sw2_reg>;
+};
+
+&reg_vdd2p5 {
+	vin-supply = <&sw2_reg>;
+};
+
 &uart1 {
 	pinctrl-names = "default";
 	pinctrl-0 = <&pinctrl_uart1>;
-- 
2.29.2


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: imx6q-dhcom: Add PU,VDD1P1,VDD2P5 regulators

[Shawn Guo]

On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 12:54:03AM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> Per schematic, both PU and SOC regulator are supplied from LTC3676 SW1
> via VDDSOC_IN rail, add the PU input. Both VDD1P1, VDD2P5 are supplied
> from LTC3676 SW2 via VDDHIGH_IN rail, add both inputs.
> 
> Fixes: 52c7a088badd ("ARM: dts: imx6q: Add support for the DHCOM iMX6 SoM and PDK2")

It's more like an improvement or additions rather than fixes.  I dropped
the tag and applied for -next.

Shawn

> Cc: Christoph Niedermaier <cniedermaier@dh-electronics.com>
> Cc: Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com>
> Cc: Ludwig Zenz <lzenz@dh-electronics.com>
> Cc: NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@nxp.com>
> Cc: Shawn Guo <shawnguo@kernel.org>
> ---
>  arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q-dhcom-som.dtsi | 12 ++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q-dhcom-som.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q-dhcom-som.dtsi
> index 236fc205c389..d0768ae429fa 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q-dhcom-som.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q-dhcom-som.dtsi
> @@ -406,6 +406,18 @@ &reg_soc {
>  	vin-supply = <&sw1_reg>;
>  };
>  
> +&reg_pu {
> +	vin-supply = <&sw1_reg>;
> +};
> +
> +&reg_vdd1p1 {
> +	vin-supply = <&sw2_reg>;
> +};
> +
> +&reg_vdd2p5 {
> +	vin-supply = <&sw2_reg>;
> +};
> +
>  &uart1 {
>  	pinctrl-names = "default";
>  	pinctrl-0 = <&pinctrl_uart1>;
> -- 
> 2.29.2
> 

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: imx6q-dhcom: Add PU,VDD1P1,VDD2P5 regulators

[Marek Vasut]

On 3/3/21 1:56 PM, Shawn Guo wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 12:54:03AM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> Per schematic, both PU and SOC regulator are supplied from LTC3676 SW1
>> via VDDSOC_IN rail, add the PU input. Both VDD1P1, VDD2P5 are supplied
>> from LTC3676 SW2 via VDDHIGH_IN rail, add both inputs.
>>
>> Fixes: 52c7a088badd ("ARM: dts: imx6q: Add support for the DHCOM iMX6 SoM and PDK2")
> 
> It's more like an improvement or additions rather than fixes.  I dropped
> the tag and applied for -next.

I would argue that describing SoC regulators correctly is a bugfix, 
since it can lead to stability issues of the SoC.

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: imx6q-dhcom: Add PU,VDD1P1,VDD2P5 regulators

[Shawn Guo]

On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 03:04:07PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> On 3/3/21 1:56 PM, Shawn Guo wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 12:54:03AM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > Per schematic, both PU and SOC regulator are supplied from LTC3676 SW1
> > > via VDDSOC_IN rail, add the PU input. Both VDD1P1, VDD2P5 are supplied
> > > from LTC3676 SW2 via VDDHIGH_IN rail, add both inputs.
> > > 
> > > Fixes: 52c7a088badd ("ARM: dts: imx6q: Add support for the DHCOM iMX6 SoM and PDK2")
> > 
> > It's more like an improvement or additions rather than fixes.  I dropped
> > the tag and applied for -next.
> 
> I would argue that describing SoC regulators correctly is a bugfix, since it
> can lead to stability issues of the SoC.

Then resend the patch with details of the issue that it fixes.

Shawn

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: imx6q-dhcom: Add PU,VDD1P1,VDD2P5 regulators

[Marek Vasut]

On 3/4/21 8:56 AM, Shawn Guo wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 03:04:07PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> On 3/3/21 1:56 PM, Shawn Guo wrote:
>>> On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 12:54:03AM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>>> Per schematic, both PU and SOC regulator are supplied from LTC3676 SW1
>>>> via VDDSOC_IN rail, add the PU input. Both VDD1P1, VDD2P5 are supplied
>>>> from LTC3676 SW2 via VDDHIGH_IN rail, add both inputs.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: 52c7a088badd ("ARM: dts: imx6q: Add support for the DHCOM iMX6 SoM and PDK2")
>>>
>>> It's more like an improvement or additions rather than fixes.  I dropped
>>> the tag and applied for -next.
>>
>> I would argue that describing SoC regulators correctly is a bugfix, since it
>> can lead to stability issues of the SoC.
> 
> Then resend the patch with details of the issue that it fixes.

Can you please tell me what is missing in the original patch description 
that justifies dropping the Fixes: tag ? I would argue that fully 
describing CPU regulators in DT is a fix which should go through the 
stable tree and the original patch description is accurate.

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: imx6q-dhcom: Add PU,VDD1P1,VDD2P5 regulators

[Shawn Guo]

On Thu, Mar 04, 2021 at 01:07:32PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> On 3/4/21 8:56 AM, Shawn Guo wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 03:04:07PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > On 3/3/21 1:56 PM, Shawn Guo wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 12:54:03AM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > > > Per schematic, both PU and SOC regulator are supplied from LTC3676 SW1
> > > > > via VDDSOC_IN rail, add the PU input. Both VDD1P1, VDD2P5 are supplied
> > > > > from LTC3676 SW2 via VDDHIGH_IN rail, add both inputs.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Fixes: 52c7a088badd ("ARM: dts: imx6q: Add support for the DHCOM iMX6 SoM and PDK2")
> > > > 
> > > > It's more like an improvement or additions rather than fixes.  I dropped
> > > > the tag and applied for -next.
> > > 
> > > I would argue that describing SoC regulators correctly is a bugfix, since it
> > > can lead to stability issues of the SoC.
> > 
> > Then resend the patch with details of the issue that it fixes.
> 
> Can you please tell me what is missing in the original patch description
> that justifies dropping the Fixes: tag ? I would argue that fully describing
> CPU regulators in DT is a fix which should go through the stable tree and
> the original patch description is accurate.

You claim that the patch fixes a stability issue, but commit log
mentions nothing about it.

Shawn

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: imx6q-dhcom: Add PU,VDD1P1,VDD2P5 regulators

[Marek Vasut]

On 3/5/21 9:39 AM, Shawn Guo wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 04, 2021 at 01:07:32PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> On 3/4/21 8:56 AM, Shawn Guo wrote:
>>> On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 03:04:07PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>>> On 3/3/21 1:56 PM, Shawn Guo wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 12:54:03AM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>>>>> Per schematic, both PU and SOC regulator are supplied from LTC3676 SW1
>>>>>> via VDDSOC_IN rail, add the PU input. Both VDD1P1, VDD2P5 are supplied
>>>>>> from LTC3676 SW2 via VDDHIGH_IN rail, add both inputs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fixes: 52c7a088badd ("ARM: dts: imx6q: Add support for the DHCOM iMX6 SoM and PDK2")
>>>>>
>>>>> It's more like an improvement or additions rather than fixes.  I dropped
>>>>> the tag and applied for -next.
>>>>
>>>> I would argue that describing SoC regulators correctly is a bugfix, since it
>>>> can lead to stability issues of the SoC.
>>>
>>> Then resend the patch with details of the issue that it fixes.
>>
>> Can you please tell me what is missing in the original patch description
>> that justifies dropping the Fixes: tag ? I would argue that fully describing
>> CPU regulators in DT is a fix which should go through the stable tree and
>> the original patch description is accurate.
> 
> You claim that the patch fixes a stability issue, but commit log
> mentions nothing about it.

Correction, I claim it can lead to stability issues, so far none were 
observed to my knowledge. But I would argue a correct regulator setup in 
DT for a specific device is a bugfix and should go through stable tree. 
Please correct me if I'm wrong.

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: imx6q-dhcom: Add PU,VDD1P1,VDD2P5 regulators

[Shawn Guo]

On Fri, Mar 05, 2021 at 12:19:25PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> On 3/5/21 9:39 AM, Shawn Guo wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 04, 2021 at 01:07:32PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > On 3/4/21 8:56 AM, Shawn Guo wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 03:04:07PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > > > On 3/3/21 1:56 PM, Shawn Guo wrote:
> > > > > > On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 12:54:03AM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > > > > > Per schematic, both PU and SOC regulator are supplied from LTC3676 SW1
> > > > > > > via VDDSOC_IN rail, add the PU input. Both VDD1P1, VDD2P5 are supplied
> > > > > > > from LTC3676 SW2 via VDDHIGH_IN rail, add both inputs.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Fixes: 52c7a088badd ("ARM: dts: imx6q: Add support for the DHCOM iMX6 SoM and PDK2")
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > It's more like an improvement or additions rather than fixes.  I dropped
> > > > > > the tag and applied for -next.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I would argue that describing SoC regulators correctly is a bugfix, since it
> > > > > can lead to stability issues of the SoC.
> > > > 
> > > > Then resend the patch with details of the issue that it fixes.
> > > 
> > > Can you please tell me what is missing in the original patch description
> > > that justifies dropping the Fixes: tag ? I would argue that fully describing
> > > CPU regulators in DT is a fix which should go through the stable tree and
> > > the original patch description is accurate.
> > 
> > You claim that the patch fixes a stability issue, but commit log
> > mentions nothing about it.
> 
> Correction, I claim it can lead to stability issues, so far none were
> observed to my knowledge. But I would argue a correct regulator setup in DT
> for a specific device is a bugfix and should go through stable tree. Please
> correct me if I'm wrong.

All I'm asking is that you resend the patch with commit log stating why
this is a bugfix and should go through stable tree, because it's not
obvious at least to me.

Shawn

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: imx6q-dhcom: Add PU,VDD1P1,VDD2P5 regulators

[Shawn Guo]

On Sat, Mar 6, 2021 at 7:10 PM Shawn Guo <shawnguo@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 05, 2021 at 12:19:25PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > On 3/5/21 9:39 AM, Shawn Guo wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 04, 2021 at 01:07:32PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > > On 3/4/21 8:56 AM, Shawn Guo wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 03:04:07PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > > > > On 3/3/21 1:56 PM, Shawn Guo wrote:
> > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 12:54:03AM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > > > > > > Per schematic, both PU and SOC regulator are supplied from LTC3676 SW1
> > > > > > > > via VDDSOC_IN rail, add the PU input. Both VDD1P1, VDD2P5 are supplied
> > > > > > > > from LTC3676 SW2 via VDDHIGH_IN rail, add both inputs.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Fixes: 52c7a088badd ("ARM: dts: imx6q: Add support for the DHCOM iMX6 SoM and PDK2")
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It's more like an improvement or additions rather than fixes.  I dropped
> > > > > > > the tag and applied for -next.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I would argue that describing SoC regulators correctly is a bugfix, since it
> > > > > > can lead to stability issues of the SoC.
> > > > >
> > > > > Then resend the patch with details of the issue that it fixes.
> > > >
> > > > Can you please tell me what is missing in the original patch description
> > > > that justifies dropping the Fixes: tag ? I would argue that fully describing
> > > > CPU regulators in DT is a fix which should go through the stable tree and
> > > > the original patch description is accurate.
> > >
> > > You claim that the patch fixes a stability issue, but commit log
> > > mentions nothing about it.
> >
> > Correction, I claim it can lead to stability issues, so far none were
> > observed to my knowledge. But I would argue a correct regulator setup in DT
> > for a specific device is a bugfix and should go through stable tree. Please
> > correct me if I'm wrong.
>
> All I'm asking is that you resend the patch with commit log stating why
> this is a bugfix and should go through stable tree, because it's not
> obvious at least to me.

In case it's still not clear, the message you replied me multiple
times here should really be put into the commit log.

Shawn

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: imx6q-dhcom: Add PU,VDD1P1,VDD2P5 regulators

[Marek Vasut]

On 3/6/21 12:21 PM, Shawn Guo wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 6, 2021 at 7:10 PM Shawn Guo <shawnguo@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 05, 2021 at 12:19:25PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>> On 3/5/21 9:39 AM, Shawn Guo wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Mar 04, 2021 at 01:07:32PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>>>> On 3/4/21 8:56 AM, Shawn Guo wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 03:04:07PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>>>>>> On 3/3/21 1:56 PM, Shawn Guo wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 12:54:03AM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Per schematic, both PU and SOC regulator are supplied from LTC3676 SW1
>>>>>>>>> via VDDSOC_IN rail, add the PU input. Both VDD1P1, VDD2P5 are supplied
>>>>>>>>> from LTC3676 SW2 via VDDHIGH_IN rail, add both inputs.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Fixes: 52c7a088badd ("ARM: dts: imx6q: Add support for the DHCOM iMX6 SoM and PDK2")
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's more like an improvement or additions rather than fixes.  I dropped
>>>>>>>> the tag and applied for -next.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I would argue that describing SoC regulators correctly is a bugfix, since it
>>>>>>> can lead to stability issues of the SoC.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Then resend the patch with details of the issue that it fixes.
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you please tell me what is missing in the original patch description
>>>>> that justifies dropping the Fixes: tag ? I would argue that fully describing
>>>>> CPU regulators in DT is a fix which should go through the stable tree and
>>>>> the original patch description is accurate.
>>>>
>>>> You claim that the patch fixes a stability issue, but commit log
>>>> mentions nothing about it.
>>>
>>> Correction, I claim it can lead to stability issues, so far none were
>>> observed to my knowledge. But I would argue a correct regulator setup in DT
>>> for a specific device is a bugfix and should go through stable tree. Please
>>> correct me if I'm wrong.
>>
>> All I'm asking is that you resend the patch with commit log stating why
>> this is a bugfix and should go through stable tree, because it's not
>> obvious at least to me.
> 
> In case it's still not clear, the message you replied me multiple
> times here should really be put into the commit log.

I added the Fixes tag, so that should indicate this is a bugfix and 
should be backported. However, no stability issues were observed thus 
far, hence none are described in the commit message. The commit message 
says exactly what this patch does.

Please tell me what you would prefer to have in the commit message 
differently, spell it out for me, because I clearly do not get it.

Thank you

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: imx6q-dhcom: Add PU,VDD1P1,VDD2P5 regulators

[Shawn Guo]

On Sun, Mar 7, 2021 at 12:17 AM Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de> wrote:
>
> On 3/6/21 12:21 PM, Shawn Guo wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 6, 2021 at 7:10 PM Shawn Guo <shawnguo@kernel.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Fri, Mar 05, 2021 at 12:19:25PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >>> On 3/5/21 9:39 AM, Shawn Guo wrote:
> >>>> On Thu, Mar 04, 2021 at 01:07:32PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >>>>> On 3/4/21 8:56 AM, Shawn Guo wrote:
> >>>>>> On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 03:04:07PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 3/3/21 1:56 PM, Shawn Guo wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 12:54:03AM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Per schematic, both PU and SOC regulator are supplied from LTC3676 SW1
> >>>>>>>>> via VDDSOC_IN rail, add the PU input. Both VDD1P1, VDD2P5 are supplied
> >>>>>>>>> from LTC3676 SW2 via VDDHIGH_IN rail, add both inputs.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Fixes: 52c7a088badd ("ARM: dts: imx6q: Add support for the DHCOM iMX6 SoM and PDK2")
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> It's more like an improvement or additions rather than fixes.  I dropped
> >>>>>>>> the tag and applied for -next.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I would argue that describing SoC regulators correctly is a bugfix, since it
> >>>>>>> can lead to stability issues of the SoC.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Then resend the patch with details of the issue that it fixes.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Can you please tell me what is missing in the original patch description
> >>>>> that justifies dropping the Fixes: tag ? I would argue that fully describing
> >>>>> CPU regulators in DT is a fix which should go through the stable tree and
> >>>>> the original patch description is accurate.
> >>>>
> >>>> You claim that the patch fixes a stability issue, but commit log
> >>>> mentions nothing about it.
> >>>
> >>> Correction, I claim it can lead to stability issues, so far none were
> >>> observed to my knowledge. But I would argue a correct regulator setup in DT
> >>> for a specific device is a bugfix and should go through stable tree. Please
> >>> correct me if I'm wrong.
> >>
> >> All I'm asking is that you resend the patch with commit log stating why
> >> this is a bugfix and should go through stable tree, because it's not
> >> obvious at least to me.
> >
> > In case it's still not clear, the message you replied me multiple
> > times here should really be put into the commit log.
>
> I added the Fixes tag, so that should indicate this is a bugfix and
> should be backported. However, no stability issues were observed thus
> far, hence none are described in the commit message. The commit message
> says exactly what this patch does.
>
> Please tell me what you would prefer to have in the commit message
> differently, spell it out for me, because I clearly do not get it.

I dropped the patch from my -next queue, as you disagree with that.
And to be clear, I'm not taking this patch as it is as a bugfix and
sending it for -rc, so feel free to ask upper level maintainers to
override me.

Shawn

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel