On 03/12/2025 11:37, David Heidelberg wrote:
On 03/12/2025 09:42, Paul Sajna wrote:
December 2, 2025 at 10:34 AM, "Konrad Dybcio"
<[email protected] mailto:[email protected]?
to=%22Konrad%20Dybcio%22%20%3Ckonrad.dybcio%40oss.qualcomm.com%3E >
wrote:
On 12/2/25 5:41 AM, Paul Sajna wrote:
December 1, 2025 at 12:41 PM, "Konrad Dybcio"
<[email protected]
mailto:[email protected]?
to=%22Konrad%20Dybcio%22%20%3Ckonrad.dybcio%40oss.qualcomm.com%3E >
wrote:
On 11/25/25 9:12 AM, Paul Sajna wrote:
It causes this warning
[ 0.000000] OF: reserved mem: OVERLAP DETECTED!
framebuffer@9d400000 mailto:framebuffer@9d400000
(0x000000009d400000--0x000000009f800000) overlaps with
memory@9d400000 mailto:memory@9d400000
(0x000000009d400000--0x000000009f800000)
Signed-off-by: Paul Sajna <[email protected]>
---
It's defined for both devices that include this dtsi.. perhaps you
could remove it from there
Konrad
I don't have a judyp to test with and prefer to limit scope.
This is a mechanical change
Konrad
Sorry, I tried to have a look at what you meant but didn't quite
understand. In this patch I changed the dtsi that is included by both
already. I don't see any other reserved-mem nodes in judyp. Do you
mean I should remove the framebuffer from judyp? I don't think that's
wise since a panel driver isn't added as far as I know.
I think this warning likely comes from sdm845-mainline repo, as it has
extra patches, which trying to abstract framebuffer into sdm845.dtsi,
where it likely conflicts, have you tried against clean 6.18-rcX or next?
... or sdm845-next repo [1]?
I sent the patches moving framebuffer from sdm845-mainline repository as
RFC [2], but so far it's not clear to me if these should go in or not.
David
[1] https://gitlab.com/sdm845/sdm845-next/-/commits/sdm845-next
[2]
https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
David
--
David Heidelberg
