Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: cpufreq: qcom-hw: Document Shikra CPUFREQ Hardware

From: Imran Shaik

Date: Tue May 05 2026 - 04:52:00 EST




On 04-05-2026 03:53 pm, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On Fri, May 01, 2026 at 12:45:44PM +0530, Imran Shaik wrote:
The Qualcomm Shikra cpufreq hardware is functionally identical to EPSS,
but supports only up to 12 frequency lookup table (LUT) entries. Introduce
qcom,cpufreq-epss-lite to represent this constrained EPSS variant.

The entire point of having a generic compatible is that it MUST match
all devices. If it does not, then it is pointless to push that generic
compatible.

I am speaking about qcom,cpufreq-epss.

That's nothing new, I was arguing about it already, but now you have
confirmation of the mess introduced by generic compatibles. Solution is
not to add more generic compatibles, because what will be next?
qcom,cpufreq-epss-lighter?
qcom,cpufreq-epss-more-lite?
qcom,cpufreq-epss-high?

Same was here:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240828203721.2751904-17-quic_nkela@xxxxxxxxxxx/

So that's second time I object and do object for every new instance. No
to generic compatibles, they are proven to be wrong at least for
Qualcomm.

Best regards,
Krzysztof


Hi Krzysztof,

There is no functional change to the latest EPSS hardware (qcom,cpufreq-epss) in this case. The Shikra platform uses the CPU frequency scaling block, which is a predecessor of EPSS and is referred to as EPSS‑lite. The only difference between EPSS‑lite and EPSS is the maximum number of frequency look up table (LUT) entries.

This constrained EPSS block is not specific to Shikra and can be reused by other SoCs that implement the same hardware. Hence, we have added a separate epss-lite compatible and reused the existing bindings, as all other aspects of the hardware behavior and interface remain identical.

Thanks,
Imran