Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Wed, 1 Apr 2026 20:51:17 +0530 | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/2] arm64: dts: qcom: qcs6490-rb3gen2-industrial-mezzanine: Add model string | | From | Umang Chheda <> |
| |
Hello Bjorn, Dmitry,
On 3/26/2026 8:29 AM, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > On Mon, Mar 23, 2026 at 09:06:54PM +0200, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 23, 2026 at 10:33:45PM +0530, Umang Chheda wrote: >>> Hello Dmitry, >>> >>> On 3/13/2026 11:23 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: >>>> On Tue, Mar 10, 2026 at 02:09:58PM +0530, Umang Chheda wrote: >>>>> Hello Dmitry, >>>>> >>>>> On 3/10/2026 2:07 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: >>>>>> On Mon, Mar 09, 2026 at 05:49:35PM +0530, Umang Chheda wrote: >>>>>>> The RB3 Gen2 Industrial mezzanine DT file lacks a "model" property, >>>>>>> resulting in the hardware always being reported as the "Robotics RB3gen2". >>>>>>> This prevents applications and user-space tooling from distinguishing >>>>>>> the Industrial mezzanine Kit from other RB3Gen2 variants. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> To ensure consistent identification across all RB3 Gen2 mezzanines, >>>>>>> add the appropriate model string. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Umang Chheda <umang.chheda@oss.qualcomm.com> >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> .../boot/dts/qcom/qcs6490-rb3gen2-industrial-mezzanine.dtso | 4 ++++ >>>>>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcs6490-rb3gen2-industrial-mezzanine.dtso b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcs6490-rb3gen2-industrial-mezzanine.dtso >>>>>>> index 619a42b5ef48..7d6e425dae89 100644 >>>>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcs6490-rb3gen2-industrial-mezzanine.dtso >>>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcs6490-rb3gen2-industrial-mezzanine.dtso >>>>>>> @@ -8,6 +8,10 @@ >>>>>>> #include <dt-bindings/clock/qcom,gcc-sc7280.h> >>>>>>> #include <dt-bindings/pinctrl/qcom,pmic-gpio.h> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> +&{/} { >>>>>>> + model = "Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. QCS6490 RB3gen2 Industrial Mezzanine"; >>>>>> So, what happens if I combine Industrial and Vision mezzanines? >>>>> H/W does not support to connect both Industrial and vision mezzanine at same time - only single mezzanine can be >>>>> >>>>> connected at a given point in time - hence probably the above scenario would never occur. >>>> Industrial mezzanine has all LS and HS connectors, so it is possible to >>>> stack Vision mezz on top of the industrial one. >>> >>> I re-checked - from f/w side as well multiple DTSO selection is not supported - and at a single point in time only single mezz can be selected >> >> What does this have to do with the firmware? From the Linux build system >> point of view we are combining the overlay into a single >> qcs6490-rb3gen2-industrial-mezzanine.dtb file. >> >> Nothing prevents me from writing: >> >> qcs6490-rb3gen2-multi-mezzanine-dtbs := qcs6490-rb3gen2.dtb \ >> qcs6490-rb3gen2-industrial-mezzanine.dtbo \ >> qcs6490-rb3gen2-vision-mezzanine.dtbo >> dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_QCOM) += qcs6490-rb3gen2-multi-mezzanine.dtb >> >>> considering above point - is it okay to have this patch ? I believe it would be good to have model string in the DTSO file added. >> >> No. A _mezzanine_ can not be a device model. It is by definition >> something that you plug into the main device. Maybe creating something >> new, a new kit. >> >> Moreover, the model name is not an ABI, we should not be using it for >> device identification. >> > > I do agree. > > That said, as we (others) discussed during LPC, it would be very useful > for bug reporting purposes to know what overlays has been applied - or > in general what "version" of the dtb we're running the system from. > > I don't think "model" is what we're looking for there though.
Does adding something like below in the chosen node from the DTSO file works good instead of a model string to identify the list of overlays applied ?
&{/chosen} { applied-overlays { industrial-mezzanine { status = "okay"; }; }; };
> > Regards, > Bjorn > >>> Kindly share your views >> >> -- >> With best wishes >> Dmitry
Thanks, Umang
|  |