Re: [PATCH V3 5/5] arm64: dts: qcom: glymur-crd: Enable ADSP and CDSP

[Sibi Sankar <sibi.sankar@oss.qualcomm.com>]

On 2/3/2026 6:09 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 02, 2026 at 11:16:19AM +0100, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>> On 1/31/26 8:54 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jan 30, 2026 at 10:55:24AM +0100, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>>>> On 1/29/26 1:13 AM, Sibi Sankar wrote:
>>>>> Enable ADSP and CDSP on Glymur CRD board.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Sibi Sankar <sibi.sankar@oss.qualcomm.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/glymur-crd.dts | 14 ++++++++++++++
>>>>>   1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/glymur-crd.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/glymur-crd.dts
>>>>> index 0899214465ac..0eed4faa8b07 100644
>>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/glymur-crd.dts
>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/glymur-crd.dts
>>>>> @@ -487,6 +487,20 @@ &pon_resin {
>>>>>   	status = "okay";
>>>>>   };
>>>>>   
>>>>> +&remoteproc_adsp {
>>>>> +	firmware-name = "qcom/glymur/adsp.mbn",
>>>>> +			"qcom/glymur/adsp_dtb.mbn";
>>>>> +
>>>>> +	status = "okay";
>>>>> +};
>>>>> +
>>>>> +&remoteproc_cdsp {
>>>>> +	firmware-name = "qcom/glymur/cdsp.mbn",
>>>>> +			"qcom/glymur/cdsp_dtb.mbn";
>>>>> +
>>>>> +	status = "okay";
>>>>> +};
>>>> Please make sure it gets to L-F (only Kaanapali is there right now)
>>>>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@oss.qualcomm.com>
>>> Hmm, looking at x1e80100-crd which references qcom/x1e80100/adsp.mbn,
>>> but the firmware in linux-firmware is (now) targeting IoT devices,
>>> should we use WoA-like names for firmware on Glymur CRD instead
>>> (qcadsp-something.mbn). It would match what was done for the SC8280XP
>>> CRD.
>> I think it's simply time to stop pretending the firmware is generic
>> (some fw simply isn't and some fw may come from different/incompatible
>> branchpoints) and include a board name in the path
> Well... CDSP is usually generic, except for WP vs non-WP.

Hey Dmitry/Konrad,

Thanks for taking time to review the series :)

The ADSP/CDSP firmware that got upstreamed to linux-firmware got their
functionality tested on Glymur WP CRD devices.  Given that the firmware
has already landed, can I continue to use the same name as the patch and
have a different name for other boards if something specific has to be 
pushed
for IOT?

-Sibi