Re: [PATCH 1/3] dt-binding: document QCOM platforms for CTCU device
From: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
Date: 2026-02-03 09:31:59
Also in:
linux-arm-msm, linux-devicetree, lkml
On 03/02/2026 09:00, Jie Gan wrote:
On 2/3/2026 4:50 PM, Konrad Dybcio wrote:quoted
On 2/3/26 9:08 AM, Jie Gan wrote:quoted
Document the platforms that fallback to using the qcom,sa8775p-ctcu compatible for probing. Signed-off-by: Jie Gan <redacted> --- Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom,coresight-ctcu.yaml | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom,coresight-ctcu.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom,coresight- ctcu.yaml index e002f87361ad..68853db52bef 100644--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom,coresight-ctcu.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom,coresight-ctcu.yaml@@ -29,6 +29,10 @@ properties:oneOf: - items: - enum: + - qcom,glymur-ctcu + - qcom,hamoa-ctcu + - qcom,kaanapali-ctcu + - qcom,pakala-ctcuPlatforms with existing numeric compatibles should continue to use them, so that the mess is somewhat containableSure Konrad. So for Pakala, I will change it back to qcom,sm8750-ctcu
Why do we need different compatibles for the others ? Are they not all compliant to the CTCU programming model ? i.e., sa8775p-ctcu ? or even, a generic, qcom,coresight-ctcu Suzuki
Thanks, Jiequoted
Konrad