From: Umang Chheda <umang.chheda@oss.qualcomm.com>
To: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@oss.qualcomm.com>
Cc: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@kernel.org>,
Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@kernel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@kernel.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>,
linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: arm: qcom: Add monaco-evk-ac support
Date: Sat, 4 Apr 2026 16:15:54 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4d32e86f-353c-4951-89ca-46aa49d60f76@oss.qualcomm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <zyarcaimg67uivssnm4uxqiwc2jadolf5kx6moycwlbzhg4gmv@xa75wcpotzpr>
On 4/4/2026 1:58 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 03, 2026 at 04:14:28PM +0530, Umang Chheda wrote:
>> Hello Dmitry,
>>
>> On 4/1/2026 5:06 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>> On Wed, Apr 01, 2026 at 12:14:42AM +0530, Umang Chheda wrote:
>>>> Introduce bindings for the monaco-evk-ac IoT board, which is
>>>> based on the monaco-ac (QCS8300-AC) SoC variant.
>>>
>>> If it is a different SoC SKU, should it be reflected in the SoC compat
>>> strings?
>>
>> Monaco‑AC does not introduce any S/W differences compared to Monaco SoC
>> -- All IP blocks and bindings remain identical from S/W PoV, Hence
>> haven't included the SoC SKU in the SoC compat strings.
>>
>> Hope this is okay ? Your view on this ?
>
> You are descibing -AC as the main difference between the kits, but then
> you say that -AC doesn't bring new software interfaces. What is the
> difference then between monako-evk and the -ac variant?
>
The major difference between monaco-evk and monaco-ac-evk boards is that
of power grid. monaco-evk requires 4 PMICs (2x PM8650AU + Maxim MAX20018
+ TI TPS6594) to support higher power requirements of monaco-AA variant
of SoC which supports upto 40 TOPS of NPU - whereas this board
"monaco-ac-evk" supports 20 TOPS of NPU and has lesser power
requirements hence 2 PMICs suffice the power requirements (2x PM8650AU).
> Also, from the naming point of view, it is monako-ac-evk, not the other
> way.
Ack, will change this to "monaco-ac-evk" in the next version.
Also, should I change DT name "monaco-ac-sku.dts" instead of current
"monaco-evk-ac-sku" ?
>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Umang Chheda <umang.chheda@oss.qualcomm.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml | 1 +
>>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml
>>>> index ca880c105f3b..c76365a89687 100644
>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml
>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml
>>>> @@ -918,6 +918,7 @@ properties:
>>>> - enum:
>>>> - arduino,monza
>>>> - qcom,monaco-evk
>>>> + - qcom,monaco-evk-ac
>>>> - qcom,qcs8300-ride
>>>> - const: qcom,qcs8300
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> 2.34.1
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Umang
>
Thanks,
Umang
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-04-04 10:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-31 18:44 [PATCH v2 0/2] arm64: dts: qcom: Introduce support for Monaco-ac-sku Evaluation Kit Umang Chheda
2026-03-31 18:44 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: arm: qcom: Add monaco-evk-ac support Umang Chheda
2026-04-01 7:25 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2026-04-01 11:36 ` Dmitry Baryshkov
2026-04-03 10:44 ` Umang Chheda
2026-04-03 20:28 ` Dmitry Baryshkov
2026-04-04 10:45 ` Umang Chheda [this message]
2026-04-04 11:12 ` Umang Chheda
2026-04-04 19:39 ` Dmitry Baryshkov
2026-04-06 11:58 ` Umang Chheda
2026-03-31 18:44 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] arm64: dts: qcom: monaco: Add monaco-ac EVK board Umang Chheda
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4d32e86f-353c-4951-89ca-46aa49d60f76@oss.qualcomm.com \
--to=umang.chheda@oss.qualcomm.com \
--cc=andersson@kernel.org \
--cc=conor+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=dmitry.baryshkov@oss.qualcomm.com \
--cc=konradybcio@kernel.org \
--cc=krzk+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=richardcochran@gmail.com \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox