[PATCH] dt-bindings: arm-smmu: qcom: Add compatible for IPQ9650 SoC

[PATCH] dt-bindings: arm-smmu: qcom: Add compatible for IPQ9650 SoC

[Kathiravan Thirumoorthy]

Qualcomm IPQ9650 SoC include APPS SMMU that implements arm,mmu-500.
Document the compatible for the same.

Signed-off-by: Kathiravan Thirumoorthy <kathiravan.thirumoorthy@oss.qualcomm.com>
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/arm,smmu.yaml | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/arm,smmu.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/arm,smmu.yaml
index 06fb5c8e7547..226f16711d67 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/arm,smmu.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/arm,smmu.yaml
@@ -37,6 +37,7 @@ properties:
           - enum:
               - qcom,eliza-smmu-500
               - qcom,glymur-smmu-500
+              - qcom,ipq9650-smmu-500
               - qcom,kaanapali-smmu-500
               - qcom,milos-smmu-500
               - qcom,qcm2290-smmu-500

---
base-commit: e98d21c170b01ddef366f023bbfcf6b31509fa83
change-id: 20260512-ipq9650_smmu_binding-36dc05d39860

Best regards,
--  
Kathiravan Thirumoorthy <kathiravan.thirumoorthy@oss.qualcomm.com>

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: arm-smmu: qcom: Add compatible for IPQ9650 SoC

[Kathiravan Thirumoorthy]

On 5/12/2026 12:17 PM, Kathiravan Thirumoorthy wrote:
> Qualcomm IPQ9650 SoC include APPS SMMU that implements arm,mmu-500.
> Document the compatible for the same.

Kindly ignore this patch. I will repost along with DTSI changes once it 
is validated again!

>
> Signed-off-by: Kathiravan Thirumoorthy <kathiravan.thirumoorthy@oss.qualcomm.com>
> ---
>   Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/arm,smmu.yaml | 1 +
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/arm,smmu.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/arm,smmu.yaml
> index 06fb5c8e7547..226f16711d67 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/arm,smmu.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/arm,smmu.yaml
> @@ -37,6 +37,7 @@ properties:
>             - enum:
>                 - qcom,eliza-smmu-500
>                 - qcom,glymur-smmu-500
> +              - qcom,ipq9650-smmu-500
>                 - qcom,kaanapali-smmu-500
>                 - qcom,milos-smmu-500
>                 - qcom,qcm2290-smmu-500
>
> ---
> base-commit: e98d21c170b01ddef366f023bbfcf6b31509fa83
> change-id: 20260512-ipq9650_smmu_binding-36dc05d39860
>
> Best regards,
> --
> Kathiravan Thirumoorthy <kathiravan.thirumoorthy@oss.qualcomm.com>
>

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: arm-smmu: qcom: Add compatible for IPQ9650 SoC

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 15/05/2026 15:30, Kathiravan Thirumoorthy wrote:
> 
> On 5/12/2026 12:17 PM, Kathiravan Thirumoorthy wrote:
>> Qualcomm IPQ9650 SoC include APPS SMMU that implements arm,mmu-500.
>> Document the compatible for the same.
> 
> Kindly ignore this patch. I will repost along with DTSI changes once it 
> is validated again!

Preemptively, I dropped all your patches from Patchwork based on earlier
comments. Now I have proof that I should be doing that for future as
well. :/

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: arm-smmu: qcom: Add compatible for IPQ9650 SoC

[Kathiravan Thirumoorthy]

On 5/15/2026 8:46 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 15/05/2026 15:30, Kathiravan Thirumoorthy wrote:
>> On 5/12/2026 12:17 PM, Kathiravan Thirumoorthy wrote:
>>> Qualcomm IPQ9650 SoC include APPS SMMU that implements arm,mmu-500.
>>> Document the compatible for the same.
>> Kindly ignore this patch. I will repost along with DTSI changes once it
>> is validated again!
> Preemptively, I dropped all your patches from Patchwork based on earlier
> comments. Now I have proof that I should be doing that for future as
> well. :/

I understand your frustration. Apologies for that. Please note that, I 
have validated all the changes before posting.

In this case, when I was cross checking the HW doc for some other 
details and I noticed that SMMU interrupts are changed and HW folks 
haven't notified us. Hence I wanted to re-validate the change and post 
it. I don't want to change the binding (if any such case arises), hence 
requested to drop this patch. Hope this helps.

>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof