On Tue, Nov 10, 2026 at 01:46:28PM +0100, Sarah Emery wrote:
> My understanding is that the nodes from CSB1-N10SPK3, the "K3 CoM260 TQ"
> and the "K3 CoM260 IFX TQ" are all the same: a "K3 CoM260" module on a
> "TQ" or "IFX TQ" carrier board.
>
> Is there two different carrier boards name "TQ" and "IFX TQ"? Or is it
> just the same thing, called differently in this patch and in the EEPROM?

They are the same carrier board. The only difference is the power scheme
of the CPU clusters. The bootloader programs those regulators at boot,
and upstream Linux currently keeps the voltages it leaves. Support for
the regulators is not upstream yet, so the two boards cannot be told
apart in the device tree for now.

> I'm not sure how devices out there are referencing themselves. But if it
> is in fact one device and the EEPROM calls it "k3-com260-tq", this patch
> will not work for device-tree matching.
>
> What do you think? Can you clarify the situation?

You are right, thanks for pointing this out. I only had an IFX TQ board
when I sent the series, so I did not notice that the TQ nodes identify
themselves as k3_com260_tq in the EEPROM.

I will restructure the series as k3-com260-tq.dtsi holding the shared
carrier description, with k3-com260-tq.dts and k3-com260-ifx-tq.dts on
top of it that only set model and compatible. I will add
k3-com260-tq-power.dtsi and k3-com260-ifx-tq-power.dtsi for the two
power schemes later.

Yixun, what do you think?

-- 
Troy Mitchell