Skip to content

Revert "qcs615-ride.conf: stop setting QCOM_DTB_DEFAULT" #1421

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Open
lumag wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Revert "qcs615-ride.conf: stop setting QCOM_DTB_DEFAULT" #1421

lumag wants to merge 1 commit into from
+2 −0

Conversation

@lumag
Copy link
Contributor

@lumag lumag commented Jan 21, 2026

This reverts commit b6d483f as the QCS615 Ride boards are not yet supported by the multi-DTB image.

@lumag
Revert "qcs615-ride.conf: stop setting QCOM_DTB_DEFAULT"
d5af85c 
This reverts commit b6d483f as the
QCS615 Ride boards are not yet supported by the multi-DTB image.

Signed-off-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@oss.qualcomm.com>
@lumag lumag marked this pull request as ready for review January 21, 2026 23:11
@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jan 22, 2026

Test run workflow

Test jobs for commit d5af85c

@test-reporting-app
Copy link

test-reporting-app bot commented Jan 22, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Test Results

 19 files   68 suites   55m 38s ⏱️
 35 tests  33 ✅ 0 💤 2 ❌
656 runs  653 ✅ 1 💤 2 ❌

For more details on these failures, see this check.

Results for commit d5af85c.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jan 22, 2026

Test run workflow

Test jobs for commit d5af85c

@vkraleti
Copy link
Contributor

vkraleti commented Jan 22, 2026

I am actively working with @mwasilew and @smuppand to replace the unsupported Talos devices in test bed. Post that this change is not needed.

@lumag
Copy link
Contributor Author

lumag commented Jan 22, 2026

I am actively working with @mwasilew and @smuppand to replace the unsupported Talos devices in test bed. Post that this change is not needed.

Will QCS615 Ride suddenly get support from the DTB metadata? How can it be "not needed"?

@vkraleti
Copy link
Contributor

vkraleti commented Jan 22, 2026 •
edited
Loading

I am actively working with @mwasilew and @smuppand to replace the unsupported Talos devices in test bed. Post that this change is not needed.

Will QCS615 Ride suddenly get support from the DTB metadata? How can it be "not needed"?

When a board is referred as QCS615‑Ride, it does not mean that all such boards have the same SoC. There are several Ride board variants built with different parts like SA6145P, SA4155P, SA6155, and possibly more. These are automotive parts and are non‑POR for the QLI program. Some of these non‑POR boards are currently being used by the test teams. The request is to replace them with the correct boards, whose SoC_ID is 0x2A8, which has support in qcom-dtb-metadata

@lumag
Copy link
Contributor Author

lumag commented Jan 22, 2026

I am actively working with @mwasilew and @smuppand to replace the unsupported Talos devices in test bed. Post that this change is not needed.

Will QCS615 Ride suddenly get support from the DTB metadata? How can it be "not needed"?

When a board is referred as QCS615‑Ride, it does not mean that all such boards have the same SoC. There are several Ride board variants built with different parts like SA6145P, SA4155P, SA6155, and possibly more. These are automotive parts and are non‑POR for the QLI program. Some of these non‑POR boards are currently being used by the test teams. The request is to replace them with the correct boards, whose SoC_ID is 0x2A8, which has support in qcom-dtb-metadata

For all targets we have (or plan to have) two kinds of board: the older Ride and newer IQ devices. Old boards are not supported by the qcom-dtb-metadata, so it was a mistake to make qcs615-ride use multi-dtb image. This PR restores status quo: it makes QCS615 Ride work again. It has (almost) nothing to do with the boards in our lab: even if we had none and we got a similar bug report, we should have reverted the offending commit. I don't understand, what and why we are discussing here.

@vkraleti
Copy link
Contributor

vkraleti commented Jan 22, 2026 •
edited
Loading

I am actively working with @mwasilew and @smuppand to replace the unsupported Talos devices in test bed. Post that this change is not needed.

Will QCS615 Ride suddenly get support from the DTB metadata? How can it be "not needed"?

When a board is referred as QCS615‑Ride, it does not mean that all such boards have the same SoC. There are several Ride board variants built with different parts like SA6145P, SA4155P, SA6155, and possibly more. These are automotive parts and are non‑POR for the QLI program. Some of these non‑POR boards are currently being used by the test teams. The request is to replace them with the correct boards, whose SoC_ID is 0x2A8, which has support in qcom-dtb-metadata

For all targets we have (or plan to have) two kinds of board: the older Ride and newer IQ devices. Old boards are not supported by the qcom-dtb-metadata, so it was a mistake to make qcs615-ride use multi-dtb image. This PR restores status quo: it makes QCS615 Ride work again. It has (almost) nothing to do with the boards in our lab: even if we had none and we got a similar bug report, we should have reverted the offending commit. I don't understand, what and why we are discussing here.

AFAIK, sticking to a single DTB on older boards was never intended. Multi‑DTB is mandated for all boards to ensure that CAMX, Display, and other planned overlays are exercised as expected. Even on QCS8300/9100 Ride boards, once CI has the correct set of devices, we will need to switch back to multi‑DTB.

@sbanerjee-quic @shashim-quic @quic-kaushalk can you confirm?

@ricardosalveti
Copy link
Contributor

ricardosalveti commented Jan 22, 2026

I am actively working with @mwasilew and @smuppand to replace the unsupported Talos devices in test bed. Post that this change is not needed.

Will QCS615 Ride suddenly get support from the DTB metadata? How can it be "not needed"?

When a board is referred as QCS615‑Ride, it does not mean that all such boards have the same SoC. There are several Ride board variants built with different parts like SA6145P, SA4155P, SA6155, and possibly more. These are automotive parts and are non‑POR for the QLI program. Some of these non‑POR boards are currently being used by the test teams. The request is to replace them with the correct boards, whose SoC_ID is 0x2A8, which has support in qcom-dtb-metadata

For all targets we have (or plan to have) two kinds of board: the older Ride and newer IQ devices. Old boards are not supported by the qcom-dtb-metadata, so it was a mistake to make qcs615-ride use multi-dtb image. This PR restores status quo: it makes QCS615 Ride work again. It has (almost) nothing to do with the boards in our lab: even if we had none and we got a similar bug report, we should have reverted the offending commit. I don't understand, what and why we are discussing here.

AFAIK, sticking to a single DTB on older boards was never intended. Multi‑DTB is mandated for all boards to ensure that CAMX, Display, and other planned overlays are exercised as expected. Even on QCS8300/9100 Ride boards, once CI has the correct set of devices, we will need to switch back to multi‑DTB.

@sbanerjee-quic @shashim-quic @quic-kaushalk can you confirm?

I asked before, but why can't we just add the ids for the current ride boards we are using? Isn't it just a matter of adding the SoC id in qcom-dtb-metadata? Not supporting this board (and replacing) just because of a single metadata entry is not the right approach here, because we still have several of them around (I got one talos and lemans and would like to keep both working here, they are expensive).

@ricardosalveti
Copy link
Contributor

ricardosalveti commented Jan 22, 2026

Old boards are not supported by the qcom-dtb-metadata, so it was a mistake to make qcs615-ride use multi-dtb image.

+1, I would like to merge this PR as well since it is a regression.

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jan 22, 2026

Test run workflow

Test jobs for commit d5af85c

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@ricardosalveti ricardosalveti ricardosalveti approved these changes

@vkraleti vkraleti Awaiting requested review from vkraleti vkraleti is a code owner

@sbanerjee-quic sbanerjee-quic Awaiting requested review from sbanerjee-quic sbanerjee-quic is a code owner

@ndechesne ndechesne Awaiting requested review from ndechesne ndechesne is a code owner

At least 2 approving reviews are required to merge this pull request.

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@lumag @vkraleti @ricardosalveti