Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] arm64: dts: qcom: talos-evk: Add support for QCS615 talos evk board

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On Tue, Oct 28, 2025 at 11:02:48AM +0530, Sudarshan Shetty wrote:
> Introduce the device tree support for the QCS615-based talos-evk
> platform, which follows the SMARC (Smart Mobility ARChitecture)
> standard. The platform is composed of two main hardware
> components: the talos-evk-som and the talos-evk carrier board.
> 
> The talos-evk-som is a compact System on Module that integrates the
> QCS615 SoC, PMIC, and essential GPIO connectivity. It follows the
> SMARC standard, which defines a modular form factor allowing the SoM
> to be paired with different carrier boards for varied applications.

Drop paragraph, completely redundant. Please write concise, informative
messages, not something redundant and obvious. Or worse - marketing
junk.

> 
> The talos-evk is one such carrier board, designed for evaluation
> and development purposes. It provides additional peripherals
> such as UART, USB, and other interfaces to enable rapid
> prototyping and hardware bring-up.
> 
> This initial device tree provides the basic configuration needed
> to boot the platform to a UART shell. Further patches will extend
> support for additional peripherals and subsystems.

Drop paragraph, it is contradictory to the next one.

> 
> The initial device tree includes basic support for:
> 
> - CPU and memory
> 

Drop blank lines

between

each

of

points. No need to inflate already huge commit msg.


> - UART
> 
> - GPIOs
> 
> - Regulators
> 
> - PMIC
> 
> - Early console
> 
> - AT24MAC602 EEPROM
> 
> - MCP2515 SPI to CAN
> 
> - Hook up the ADV7535 DSI-to-HDMI bridge
> 
> - Add DP connector node and MDSS DisplayPort controller.
> 
> QCS615 talos-evk uses a Quectel AF68E WiFi/BT module (PCIe for
> WiFi and UART for Bluetooth), which is different from the RIDE
> platform. Plan to enable these in a follow-up patch series.

Drop plans, not related. I also do not understand why you mention here
RIDE. Does it mean you are duplicating the board?

> 

..


> +&sdhc_1 {
> +	pinctrl-0 = <&sdc1_state_on>;
> +	pinctrl-1 = <&sdc1_state_off>;
> +	pinctrl-names = "default", "sleep";
> +
> +	bus-width = <8>;
> +	mmc-ddr-1_8v;
> +	mmc-hs200-1_8v;
> +	mmc-hs400-1_8v;
> +	mmc-hs400-enhanced-strobe;
> +	vmmc-supply = <&vreg_l17a>;
> +	vqmmc-supply = <&vreg_s4a>;
> +
> +	non-removable;
> +	no-sd;
> +	no-sdio;
> +
> +	status = "okay";
> +};
> +
> +&spi6 {
> +	status = "okay";
> +
> +	mcp2515@0 {

Still no improvements.

Node names should be generic. See also an explanation and list of
examples (not exhaustive) in DT specification:
https://devicetree-specification.readthedocs.io/en/latest/chapter2-devicetree-basics.html#generic-names-recommendation
If you cannot find a name matching your device, please check in kernel
sources for similar cases or you can grow the spec (via pull request to
DT spec repo).

> +		compatible = "microchip,mcp2515";
> +		reg = <0>;
> +		clock-frequency = <20000000>;
> +		interrupts-extended = <&tlmm 87 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW>;
> +		spi-max-frequency = <10000000>;
> +		vdd-supply = <&vreg_v3p3_can>;
> +		xceiver-supply = <&vreg_v5p0_can>;
> +	};
> +};

..

> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/talos-evk.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/talos-evk.dts
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..5c2ac67383e7
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/talos-evk.dts
> @@ -0,0 +1,133 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause
> +/*
> + * Copyright (c) Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. and/or its subsidiaries.
> + */
> +/dts-v1/;
> +
> +#include "talos-evk-som.dtsi"
> +
> +/ {
> +	model = "Qualcomm QCS615 IQ 615 EVK";
> +	compatible = "qcom,talos-evk", "qcom,qcs615", "qcom,sm6150";
> +	chassis-type = "embedded";
> +
> +	aliases {
> +		mmc1 = &sdhc_2;
> +	};
> +
> +	dp0-connector {

dp-connector, unless there is here dp1. But then follow standard
practice of adding suffixes, so connector-0, connector-1, etc. I could
understand dp-connector-1 if you find dp-connector here:

https://devicetree-specification.readthedocs.io/en/latest/chapter2-devicetree-basics.html#generic-names-recommendation

> +		compatible = "dp-connector";
> +		label = "DP0";
> +		type = "full-size";
> +
> +		hpd-gpios = <&tlmm 104 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>;
> +
> +		port {
> +			dp0_connector_in: endpoint {
> +				remote-endpoint = <&mdss_dp0_out>;
> +			};
> +		};
> +	};

...

> +
> +&i2c1 {
> +	clock-frequency = <400000>;
> +
> +	status = "okay";
> +
> +	adv7535: adv7535@3d {

Still no improvements.

Node names should be generic. See also an explanation and list of
examples (not exhaustive) in DT specification:
https://devicetree-specification.readthedocs.io/en/latest/chapter2-devicetree-basics.html#generic-names-recommendation
If you cannot find a name matching your device, please check in kernel
sources for similar cases or you can grow the spec (via pull request to
DT spec repo).

Best regards,
Krzysztof