Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: arm: qcom: Add monaco-evk-ac-sku support

[Umang Chheda <umang.chheda@oss.qualcomm.com>]

On 3/30/2026 3:17 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 30/03/2026 11:36, Umang Chheda wrote:
>> Hello Krzysztof,
>>
>> On 3/30/2026 12:24 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 30/03/2026 08:50, Umang Chheda wrote:
>>>> Hello Krzysztof,
>>>>
>>>> On 3/29/2026 3:22 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, Mar 28, 2026 at 05:11:17PM +0530, Umang Chheda wrote:
>>>>>> Introduce new bindings for the monaco-evk-ac-sku,
>>>>>> an IoT board based on the QCS8300-AC variant SoC.
>>>>> Please wrap commit message according to Linux coding style / submission
>>>>> process (neither too early nor over the limit):
>>>>> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.4-rc1/source/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst#L597
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ack
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Umang Chheda <umang.chheda@oss.qualcomm.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml | 1 +
>>>>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml
>>>>>> index ca880c105f3b..07053cc2ac1c 100644
>>>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml
>>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml
>>>>>> @@ -918,6 +918,7 @@ properties:
>>>>>>            - enum:
>>>>>>                - arduino,monza
>>>>>>                - qcom,monaco-evk
>>>>>> +              - qcom,monaco-evk-ac-sku
>>>>> Why adding name 'sku' to the compatible? What's the meaning here?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Monaco SoC has 2 variants  - monaco-aa and monaco-ac -- "monaco-evk" board uses monaco-aa variant of SoC and this new
>>>
>>> so ac? or ac-sku? Decide.
>>>
>>>> introduced board uses the monaco-ac variant SoC. Hence added the compatible as "monaco-evk-ac-sku" to differentiate it from
>>>> monaco-evk board.
>>>
>>> Wrap your emails.
>>
>> Ack
>>>
>>> "ac" differentiates. Why do you need to say that a variant is a
>>> "-variant"?
>>>
>>
>> The intent for using "-sku" here was to match the existing upstream
>> practice where boards that are otherwise identical but differ in H/W
>> configuration (SoC variant, storage etc) are represented as separate SKUs.
>>
>> For Example:
>>   - sc7180-trogdor-*-sku.dtsi
>>   - sc7280-herobrine-*-sku.dtsi
>>   - mt8183-kukui-jacuzzi-*-sku.dts
> 
> We talk about compatible, why any of DTS names matter? You don't
> understand the meaning of sku. It makes no sense without the number/ID.
> It's like you called it "-revision"...

Thanks for the explanation - I get it now!

I agree that encoding this as "qcom,monaco-evk-ac" is sufficient for
the compatible, and that "-sku" does not add additional compatibility
information.

I will update the binding to drop "-sku" from the compatible.

Thanks for the review.

> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof

Thanks,
Umang