Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: soc: qcom: pmic-glink: Document batteryless property

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 22/05/2026 11:24, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> On 5/21/26 11:58 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 21/05/2026 10:46, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>>> On 5/21/26 9:20 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>>> Since firmware does not have a way to dynamically tell if it on a
>>>>> debug-board powered device or a DCIN powered device, We are required to
>>>>> add this new DT property.
>>>>
>>>> Neither debug-board powered device nor battery-less will have
>>>> monitored-battery, thus again, why lack of that property cannot tell you
>>>> what you need?
>>>
>>> A device with a battery will not have a monitored-battery either
>> But why? If for such device property "no battery" is suitable, then for
>> me "monitored-battery" is suitable as well. IOW, if you say that having
>> a property describing batter is not a accurate hardware property here,
>> then neither saying "no battery" is, because no batter is basically some
>> sort of battery (just like empty set is still a set, empty array is
>> still an array).
> 
> The battmgr service running on one of the remoteprocs already has all
> the information about the battery and it also handles all the type-c,
> PD and charger configuration, only letting the OS know about the
> results.
> 
> Hence, unless there's some other hardware at play (e.g. for custom
> 200 W charging), which wasn't fully implemented in the QC firmware,
> there is no reason to describe a battery separately, since the OS
> can't do anything useful with that information

That's a good explanation and it implies: "no-battery" is not suitable.

> 
> In some abstract way, perhaps monitored_battery = <&pmic_glink> could
> be thought of as valid (since that's the data source the OS gets to
> see)
> 
Best regards,
Krzysztof