Re: [PATCH 01/13] dt-bindings: soc: Introduce device bindings for CESTA Resource Manager

Krzysztof Kozlowski
2026-04-22T07:37:35Z

On Mon, Apr 20, 2026 at 09:58:54PM +0530, Jagadeesh Kona wrote:
> From: Maulik Shah <maulik.shah@oss.qualcomm.com>
>
> Add device binding documentation for Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. (QTI)
> CESTA (Client State Aggregation) Resource Manager which is responsible
> for client side management and aggregation of local resources.
>
> Signed-off-by: Maulik Shah <maulik.shah@oss.qualcomm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jagadeesh Kona <jagadeesh.kona@oss.qualcomm.com>

A nit, subject: drop second/last, redundant "device bindings for". The
"dt-bindings" prefix is already stating that these are bindings and they
cannot be for a "non-device".
See also:
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.17-rc3/source/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.rst#L18

> ---
> .../devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/qcom,crm.yaml | 83 ++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 83 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/qcom,crm.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/qcom,crm.yaml
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..a1485db8b7476b0cb0b4e8a41adc8fb4092b731f
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/qcom,crm.yaml

Filename must match compatible.

> @@ -0,0 +1,83 @@
> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
> +%YAML 1.2
> +---
> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/soc/qcom/qcom,crm.yaml#
> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
> +
> +title: Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. (QTI) CESTA Resource Manager (CRM)
> +
> +maintainers:
> + - Maulik Shah <maulik.shah@oss.qualcomm.com>
> +
> +description:
> + Support for communication with the hardened-CRM blocks. A set of SW

What is a hardened-CRM device? How can you harden a block? Are we
talking about steel manufacturing or software security?

> + client Direct Resource Voters (DRVs) in CRM provides interface to vote
> + desired power state of resources local to a subsystem.

I still don't get what this device is doing.

> +
> +properties:
> + compatible:
> + enum:
> + - qcom,sm8750-disp-crm
> +
> + label:
> + $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/string-array
> + oneOf:
> + - description: Specifies the name of the CRM.
> + items:
> + - enum:
> + - disp_crm

Nope, same as compatible so pointless.

> +
> + reg:
> + minItems: 2

There is no such syntax. And if you did run it via internal review tool,
that tool would probably tell you that.

> +
> + power-domains:
> + maxItems: 1
> +
> + interrupts:
> + minItems: 1
> + maxItems: 6

Nope. Standard bindings rules - we do not have flexible lists. Please
follow writing bindings or any of previous DTS speech slides.

> + description:
> + One interrupt for each DRV. The interrupt trips when a message complete/response is
> + received from the accelerators for the desired power state. Number of interrupts must
> + match number of DRV blocks.
> +
> + qcom,sw-drv-ids:

Drop the property. For sure we do not want drivers in the bindings.

> + $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32-array
> + minItems: 1
> + maxItems: 6
> + items:
> + minimum: 0
> + maximum: 5
> + description:
> + List of SW DRV IDs used within kernel. May contain holes as some DRVs can
> + be allocated to DSPs / can be spare.
> +
> +required:
> + - compatible
> + - label
> + - reg
> + - interrupts
> + - qcom,sw-drv-ids
> +
> +additionalProperties: false
> +
> +examples:
> + # Example of Display CRM device with SW DRVs

Drop

> + - |
> + #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/arm-gic.h>
> + #include <dt-bindings/power/qcom,rpmhpd.h>
> + disp_crm: crm@af21000 {

Drop label.

Node names should be generic. See also an explanation and list of
examples (not exhaustive) in DT specification:
https://devicetree-specification.readthedocs.io/en/latest/chapter2-devicetree-basics.html#generic-names-recommendation
If you cannot find a name matching your device, please check in kernel
sources for similar cases or you can grow the spec (via pull request to
DT spec repo).

> + compatible = "qcom,sm8750-disp-crm";
> + label = "disp_crm";
> + reg = <0x0af21000 0x6000>,
> + <0x0af29f00 0x100>;
> + power-domains = <&rpmhpd RPMHPD_MMCX>;
> + interrupts = <GIC_SPI 703 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>,
> + <GIC_SPI 708 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>,
> + <GIC_SPI 714 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>,
> + <GIC_SPI 68 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>,
> + <GIC_SPI 96 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>,
> + <GIC_SPI 249 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
> + qcom,sw-drv-ids = <0 1 2 3 4 5>;

Pointless property :/

Run this binding via internal review first, because it does not match
expected upstream submission quality and YOU ARE expected to have it
internally reviewed first.

Best regards,
Krzysztof