Re: [PATCH v2 2/8] dt-bindings: thermal: Add qcom,qmi-cooling yaml bindings

On 20/02/2026 08:29, Gaurav Kohli wrote:

On 2/11/2026 1:43 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:

quoted

On 11/02/2026 08:37, Gaurav Kohli wrote:

quoted

On 2/8/2026 3:36 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:

quoted

On 29/01/2026 13:06, Gaurav Kohli wrote:

quoted

On 1/28/2026 4:57 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Jan 27, 2026 at 09:27:16PM +0530, Gaurav Kohli wrote:

quoted

The cooling subnode of a remoteproc represents a client of the Thermal
Mitigation Device QMI service running on it. Each subnode of the cooling
node represents a single control exposed by the service.

Signed-off-by: Gaurav Kohli <redacted>
---
    .../bindings/remoteproc/qcom,pas-common.yaml  |  6 ++
    .../bindings/thermal/qcom,qmi-cooling.yaml    | 72 +++++++++++++++++++
    2 files changed, 78 insertions(+)
    create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/thermal/qcom,qmi-cooling.yaml

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/qcom,pas-common.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/qcom,pas-common.yaml
index 68c17bf18987..6a736161d5ae 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/qcom,pas-common.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/qcom,pas-common.yaml

@@ -80,6 +80,12 @@ properties:
          and devices related to the ADSP.
        unevaluatedProperties: false
    
+  cooling:
+    $ref: /schemas/thermal/qcom,qmi-cooling.yaml#
+    description:
+      Cooling subnode which represents the cooling devices exposed by the Modem.

I do not see the reason why you need 3 (!!!) children here. Everything
should be folded here.

Thanks Krzysztof for review.

Each subsystem may support multiple thermal mitigation devices through
remote TMD service.

Because of this multiplicity, introduced separate binding file.

This explains nothing. Subsystem does not matter for the binding. My
comment stays.

thanks for this suggestion, we will use qcom,pas-common.yaml to define
bindings and avoid creating new file.

I asked not to create any children nodes.

We have multiple cores within a subsystem(cdsp) and each core has its 
own independent DCVS. And also we have dedicated TSENS sensor placed on 
each core within the subsystem.

Your own example in this patch had only one device, so how do you
imagine to convince us with incomplete or half baked code?

As a result, each core requires its own cooling device, which must be 
linked to its TSENS thermal zone. Because of this, we introduced 
multiple child nodes—one for each cooling device.

So you have one device with cooling cells=1+2, no?

Best regards,
Krzysztof