Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] dt-bindings: arm: qcom: Document Shikra and its EVK boards - sashiko-bot

From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Komal Bajaj" <komal.bajaj@oss.qualcomm.com>
Cc: robh@kernel.org, conor+dt@kernel.org, olteanv@gmail.com,
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-phy@lists.infradead.org,
	neil.armstrong@linaro.org, vkoul@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] dt-bindings: arm: qcom: Document Shikra and its EVK boards
Date: Tue, 19 May 2026 11:32:34 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260519113234.BA75FC2BCB3@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260519-shikra-dt-v2-1-c01b90fb4395@oss.qualcomm.com>

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] Device tree compatible strings use generic abbreviations instead of specific hardware part numbers.
- [Low] Alphabetical sorting violation in qcom.yaml.
--

commit d5de85f1dcdd73430dd4bed54ebebe0837ba7f5e
Author: Komal Bajaj <komal.bajaj@oss.qualcomm.com>

dt-bindings: arm: qcom: Document Shikra and its EVK boards

This commit introduces compatible strings for the Qualcomm Shikra SoC in
System-on-Module (SoM) form factors and their corresponding EVK carrier
boards.

>     Add compatible strings for the CQ2390M, CQ2390S, IQ2390S SoM variant and its
>     corresponding EVK boards.

Should these compatible strings use the specific hardware part numbers
(CQ2390M, CQ2390S, IQ2390S) instead of generic abbreviations like
qcom,shikra-cqm-som?

If the generic abbreviations are kept, can the schema map these
abbreviations to the specific part numbers to document the ABI?

> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml
> index af266d584fae6..7c5c5f4fc30f7 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml
> @@ -968,6 +968,24 @@ properties:
>            - const: qcom,qcs9100
>            - const: qcom,sa8775p
>  
> +      - items:
> +          - enum:
> +              - qcom,shikra-cqm-evk
> +          - const: qcom,shikra-cqm-som
> +          - const: qcom,shikra

This isn't a bug, but should these new blocks be sorted alphabetically
based on the root SoC compatible string?

Since 'h' comes after 'd', could qcom,shikra be placed after qcom,sdm845
instead of after qcom,sa8775p?

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260519-shikra-dt-v2-0-c01b90fb4395@oss.qualcomm.com?part=1

-- 
linux-phy mailing list
linux-phy@lists.infradead.org
https://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-phy