Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: remoteproc: qcom,sm8550-pas: Make SDX75, Hawi and Maili MPSS fallback to SM8650

On Tue, Aug 04, 2026 at 11:11:29AM -0500, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 03, 2026 at 11:30:20PM +0530, Mukesh Ojha wrote:
> > SDX75, Hawi and Maili MPSS are compatible with the SM8650 MPSS as
> > they share the same set of interrupts, memory regions and power domains.
> > Rather than describing them as standalone compatibles, model them as
> > fallbacks to qcom,sm8650-mpss-pas.
> > 
> 
> This will introduce a dt-validation error in
> arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdx75.dtsi, which you fix in patch 2.

Right, but it will come at some point if we want to fix this.

> 
> But while the binding says qcom,sdx75-mpss-pas alone isn't a valid
> compatible, we support that in the driver, so we're maintaining
> backwards compatibility with current DT - until someone cleans up the
> driver to match the contract defined by the binding.
> 
> It might be reasonable to accept both of these hiccups, but you need to
> document the upside of it.
>

Thanks.

> 
> But if I read this correctly, it seems I merged qcom,hawi-mpss-pas and
> qcom,maili-mpss-pas prematurely. Based on the commit message in [1] I
> thought they would fall back to sm8650, but this patch says that was
> wrong of me - meaning that [1] should have contained a driver change as
> well. I.e. you didn't test [1], right?

Yes, it was wrong of me. I should have acknowledged Yijie's comments
publicly, saying it along with the sdx75 fix, and I did that internally with
him. I did test it against Hawi, but not for Maili, which is what Yijie
commented to take care of Maili along with Hawi.

> 
> As I said in the reply to Krzysztof, I have dropped [1] again from my
> queue.

Sure, will rebase this series accordingly with some documentation updates
as per your comment on this one.

> 
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
>

-Mukesh