linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: arm: qcom: Add bindings for IQ8 EVK board

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <39d6a38d-6728-4998-aca2-23138677123b@oss.qualcomm.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2025 10:38:00 +0200
From: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com>
To: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@....qualcomm.com>,
        Umang Chheda <umang.chheda@....qualcomm.com>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
        Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@....qualcomm.com>
Cc: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
        Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel@....qualcomm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: arm: qcom: Add bindings for IQ8 EVK
 board



On 6/26/25 5:17 AM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2025 at 06:34:19PM +0530, Umang Chheda wrote:
>> QCS8275 is another SoC under IQ8 series of SoCs. Unlike QCS8300
>> which has safety features, it doesn't have safety monitoring feature
>> of Safety-Island(SAIL) subsystem, which affects thermal management.
>>
> 
> QCS8300 and QCS8275 are both the "Monaco" SoC, with some differences in
> which nodes are "okay" and "disabled", and as you say here some side
> effects thereof.
> 
> Describing these as "Monaco" and "Monaco with Sail" would lend itself
> for a better structure.
> 
>> qcs8275-iq-8275-evk board is based on QCS8275 SOC.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Umang Chheda <umang.chheda@....qualcomm.com>
>> ---
>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml | 7 +++++++
>>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml
>> index b14206d11f8b..19823bc91a3b 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml
>> @@ -54,6 +54,7 @@ description: |
>>          msm8998
>>          qcs404
>>          qcs615
>> +        qcs8275
> 
> Please add "monaco" instead.
> 
>>          qcs8300
>>          qcs8550
>>          qcm2290
>> @@ -935,6 +936,12 @@ properties:
>>            - const: qcom,qcs404-evb
>>            - const: qcom,qcs404
>>  
>> +      - items:
>> +          - enum:
>> +              - qcom,qcs8275-iq-8275-evk
> 
> Please use the qcom,monaco- prefix. Is qcom,monaco-evk unique enough?
> We can sync up offline on this.
> 
>> +          - const: qcom,qcs8275
>> +          - const: qcom,qcs8300
> 
> Please replace these two with just qcom,monaco.

We could in theory keep the SKU id as a penultimate entry in the top
level compatible, but I'm not sure it makes sense given what we want
to achieve (just thinking out loud) - exposing soc_id through
qcom_socinfo & sysfs seems to be enough, and if it's not, we can
handle the odd cases separately.

All in all, let's go with Monaco.

Konrad