Re: [PATCH 1/4] dt-bindings: arm: qcom: Document Shikra and its EVK boards

[Komal Bajaj]

On 5/15/2026 2:21 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Tue, May 12, 2026 at 09:38:04AM +0530, Komal Bajaj wrote:
> > Shikra is a Qualcomm IoT SoC available in a System-on-Module (SoM)
> > form factor. The SoM integrates the Shikra SoC, PMICs, and essential
> > passives, and is designed to be mounted on carrier boards.
> >
> > One SoM variant is introduced:
> >    - CQM: retail variant with integrated modem (PM4125 PMIC)
> >
> > Two EVK boards are supported:
> >    - shikra-cqm-evk: pairs with the CQM SoM
> >    - shikra-cqs-evk: pairs with the CQM SoM, with no modem support
> s/CQM/CQS/

Right, will fix this typo.

> but anyway I would prefer to use full product names from
> include/dt-bindings/arm/qcom,ids.h (so CQXXXXM).

Sure, I'll update both CQM and CQS to their corresponding full name.

> > Each EVK provides debug UART, USB, and other peripheral interfaces.
> >
> > Add compatible strings for the CQM SoM variant and its two
> > corresponding EVK boards.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Komal Bajaj <komal.bajaj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >   Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml | 7 +++++++
> >   1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml
> > index 2741c07e9f41..f041d71d7957 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml
> > @@ -963,6 +963,13 @@ properties:
> >             - const: qcom,qcs9100
> >             - const: qcom,sa8775p
> >   
> > +      - items:
> > +          - enum:
> > +              - qcom,shikra-cqm-evk
> > +              - qcom,shikra-cqs-evk
> > +          - const: qcom,shikra-cqm-som
> This is not accurate. The SoM has physically different SoC - either CQM
> or CQS. You either need two lists, like Toradex is doing (e.g.
> toradex,verdin-imx95), or enum in the middle of the lists, like Renesas
> is doing (e.g. renesas,rzt2h-evk).
>
> I prefer the first option, so Toradex choice.
>
> But for sure you do not get the third solution... Really, you are not
> supposed to invent these things, but look at existing solutions (and I
> was mentioning Toradex during internal meetings whenever someone asked
> me how the SoM and carrier should be organized).

Sure, I’ll follow the Toradex approach and restructure this with 
separate compatible lists for each EVK/SoM combination, as below:

- items:
      - enum:
          - qcom,shikra-cqm-evk
      - const: qcom,shikra-cqm-som
      - const: qcom,shikra

  - items:
      - enum:
          - qcom,shikra-cqs-evk
      - const: qcom,shikra-cqs-som
      - const: qcom,shikra


Thanks
Komal