Add bindings for QCS8300 sound card, which looks fully
compatible with existing SM8250.
Signed-off-by: Mohammad Rafi Shaik <mohammad.rafi.shaik@oss.qualcomm.com>
---
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/qcom,sm8250.yaml | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/qcom,sm8250.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/qcom,sm8250.yaml
index 8ac91625dce5..eebf80c1d79a 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/qcom,sm8250.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/qcom,sm8250.yaml
@@ -35,6 +35,7 @@ properties:
- qcom,qcm6490-idp-sndcard
- qcom,qcs6490-rb3gen2-sndcard
- qcom,qcs8275-sndcard
+ - qcom,qcs8300-sndcard
- qcom,qcs9075-sndcard
- qcom,qcs9100-sndcard
- qcom,qrb4210-rb2-sndcard
--
2.34.1On 05/09/2025 16:26, Mohammad Rafi Shaik wrote: > Add bindings for QCS8300 sound card, which looks fully > compatible with existing SM8250. > > Signed-off-by: Mohammad Rafi Shaik <mohammad.rafi.shaik@oss.qualcomm.com> > --- > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/qcom,sm8250.yaml | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/qcom,sm8250.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/qcom,sm8250.yaml > index 8ac91625dce5..eebf80c1d79a 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/qcom,sm8250.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/qcom,sm8250.yaml > @@ -35,6 +35,7 @@ properties: > - qcom,qcm6490-idp-sndcard > - qcom,qcs6490-rb3gen2-sndcard > - qcom,qcs8275-sndcard So what is the point of this compatible? There is no user of it and I think you added QCS8275 for this case exactly... Shall I start reverting commits from Qualcomm because you post patches "just in case" and turns out they are completely not needed? No single user of such code? Best regards, Krzysztof
On 10/09/2025 09:26, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/qcom,sm8250.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/qcom,sm8250.yaml >> index 8ac91625dce5..eebf80c1d79a 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/qcom,sm8250.yaml >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/qcom,sm8250.yaml >> @@ -35,6 +35,7 @@ properties: >> - qcom,qcm6490-idp-sndcard >> - qcom,qcs6490-rb3gen2-sndcard >> - qcom,qcs8275-sndcard > > So what is the point of this compatible? There is no user of it and I > think you added QCS8275 for this case exactly... > > Shall I start reverting commits from Qualcomm because you post patches > "just in case" and turns out they are completely not needed? No single > user of such code? @Mark, In case it wasn't obvious, please do not merge the patch till we get some clarification. For sure it is wrong one way or another: either incomplete or just duplicated. Best regards, Krzysztof
On 9/10/2025 1:09 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 10/09/2025 09:26, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/qcom,sm8250.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/qcom,sm8250.yaml >>> index 8ac91625dce5..eebf80c1d79a 100644 >>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/qcom,sm8250.yaml >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/qcom,sm8250.yaml >>> @@ -35,6 +35,7 @@ properties: >>> - qcom,qcm6490-idp-sndcard >>> - qcom,qcs6490-rb3gen2-sndcard >>> - qcom,qcs8275-sndcard >> >> So what is the point of this compatible? There is no user of it and I >> think you added QCS8275 for this case exactly... >> >> Shall I start reverting commits from Qualcomm because you post patches >> "just in case" and turns out they are completely not needed? No single >> user of such code? > > > @Mark, > > In case it wasn't obvious, please do not merge the patch till we get > some clarification. For sure it is wrong one way or another: either > incomplete or just duplicated. > The device tree currently uses qcs8275 as the sound compatible, and the corresponding Device tree changes have already been applied and merged. Reverting this now would break the ABI. A new device tree patch with qcs8300 is currently under review: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20250910044512.1369640-1-mohammad.rafi.shaik@oss.qualcomm.com/ Once the machine driver and device tree patch with qcs8300 are accepted and merged, I will promptly submit a cleanup patch to remove of discontinued compatibles from the machine driver. > Best regards, > Krzysztof
On 10/09/2025 10:05, Mohammad Rafi Shaik wrote: > > > On 9/10/2025 1:09 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 10/09/2025 09:26, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/qcom,sm8250.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/qcom,sm8250.yaml >>>> index 8ac91625dce5..eebf80c1d79a 100644 >>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/qcom,sm8250.yaml >>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/qcom,sm8250.yaml >>>> @@ -35,6 +35,7 @@ properties: >>>> - qcom,qcm6490-idp-sndcard >>>> - qcom,qcs6490-rb3gen2-sndcard >>>> - qcom,qcs8275-sndcard >>> >>> So what is the point of this compatible? There is no user of it and I >>> think you added QCS8275 for this case exactly... >>> >>> Shall I start reverting commits from Qualcomm because you post patches >>> "just in case" and turns out they are completely not needed? No single >>> user of such code? >> >> >> @Mark, >> >> In case it wasn't obvious, please do not merge the patch till we get >> some clarification. For sure it is wrong one way or another: either >> incomplete or just duplicated. >> > > The device tree currently uses qcs8275 as the sound compatible, and > the corresponding Device tree changes have already been applied and merged. > > Reverting this now would break the ABI. If reverting would break ABI then: > > A new device tree patch with qcs8300 is currently under review: > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20250910044512.1369640-1-mohammad.rafi.shaik@oss.qualcomm.com/ This is ABI break thus NAK. > > Once the machine driver and device tree patch with qcs8300 are accepted > and merged, > > I will promptly submit a cleanup patch to remove of discontinued > compatibles from the machine driver. So this is the same hardware? Then no, we do not rename compatibles. Best regards, Krzysztof
On 9/10/2025 3:13 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 10/09/2025 10:05, Mohammad Rafi Shaik wrote: >> >> >> On 9/10/2025 1:09 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>> On 10/09/2025 09:26, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/qcom,sm8250.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/qcom,sm8250.yaml >>>>> index 8ac91625dce5..eebf80c1d79a 100644 >>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/qcom,sm8250.yaml >>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/qcom,sm8250.yaml >>>>> @@ -35,6 +35,7 @@ properties: >>>>> - qcom,qcm6490-idp-sndcard >>>>> - qcom,qcs6490-rb3gen2-sndcard >>>>> - qcom,qcs8275-sndcard >>>> >>>> So what is the point of this compatible? There is no user of it and I >>>> think you added QCS8275 for this case exactly... >>>> >>>> Shall I start reverting commits from Qualcomm because you post patches >>>> "just in case" and turns out they are completely not needed? No single >>>> user of such code? >>> >>> >>> @Mark, >>> >>> In case it wasn't obvious, please do not merge the patch till we get >>> some clarification. For sure it is wrong one way or another: either >>> incomplete or just duplicated. >>> >> >> The device tree currently uses qcs8275 as the sound compatible, and >> the corresponding Device tree changes have already been applied and merged. >> >> Reverting this now would break the ABI. > > If reverting would break ABI then: > >> >> A new device tree patch with qcs8300 is currently under review: >> >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20250910044512.1369640-1-mohammad.rafi.shaik@oss.qualcomm.com/ > > This is ABI break thus NAK. > >> >> Once the machine driver and device tree patch with qcs8300 are accepted >> and merged, >> >> I will promptly submit a cleanup patch to remove of discontinued >> compatibles from the machine driver. > > So this is the same hardware? Then no, we do not rename compatibles. > Agree, the existing compatible is discontinued naming convention, will remove existing qcs8275 and go with qcs8300. Thanks. > Best regards, > Krzysztof
On 10/09/2025 13:17, Mohammad Rafi Shaik wrote: >> >> So this is the same hardware? Then no, we do not rename compatibles. >> > > Agree, the existing compatible is discontinued naming convention, > will remove existing qcs8275 and go with qcs8300. > That would be a rename, so again "no, we do not rename compatibles". You are stuck with qcs8275. Best regards, Krzysztof
On 9/10/2025 4:54 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 10/09/2025 13:17, Mohammad Rafi Shaik wrote: >>> >>> So this is the same hardware? Then no, we do not rename compatibles. >>> >> >> Agree, the existing compatible is discontinued naming convention, >> will remove existing qcs8275 and go with qcs8300. >> > > That would be a rename, so again "no, we do not rename compatibles". > > You are stuck with qcs8275. > ACK, will drop the Renaming compatible string change. Instead of renaming the compatible string, will go with the existing compatible and fix the driver match data by updating the driver name. This approach allows us to continue using the same compatible as "qcs8275-sndcard". will update the driver match data name to QCS8300 to load the correct sound topology and ALSA UCM configuration files, which are added under the actual SoC QCS8300 directory in linux-firmware. Thanks & regards, Rafi. > Best regards, > Krzysztof
On 9/10/25 11:43 AM, 'Krzysztof Kozlowski' via kernel wrote: > On 10/09/2025 10:05, Mohammad Rafi Shaik wrote: >> >> >> On 9/10/2025 1:09 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>> On 10/09/2025 09:26, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/qcom,sm8250.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/qcom,sm8250.yaml >>>>> index 8ac91625dce5..eebf80c1d79a 100644 >>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/qcom,sm8250.yaml >>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/qcom,sm8250.yaml >>>>> @@ -35,6 +35,7 @@ properties: >>>>> - qcom,qcm6490-idp-sndcard >>>>> - qcom,qcs6490-rb3gen2-sndcard >>>>> - qcom,qcs8275-sndcard >>>> >>>> So what is the point of this compatible? There is no user of it and I >>>> think you added QCS8275 for this case exactly... >>>> >>>> Shall I start reverting commits from Qualcomm because you post patches >>>> "just in case" and turns out they are completely not needed? No single >>>> user of such code? >>> >>> >>> @Mark, >>> >>> In case it wasn't obvious, please do not merge the patch till we get >>> some clarification. For sure it is wrong one way or another: either >>> incomplete or just duplicated. >>> >> >> The device tree currently uses qcs8275 as the sound compatible, and >> the corresponding Device tree changes have already been applied and merged. >> >> Reverting this now would break the ABI. > > If reverting would break ABI then: > >> >> A new device tree patch with qcs8300 is currently under review: >> >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20250910044512.1369640-1-mohammad.rafi.shaik@oss.qualcomm.com/ > > This is ABI break thus NAK. > >> >> Once the machine driver and device tree patch with qcs8300 are accepted >> and merged, >> >> I will promptly submit a cleanup patch to remove of discontinued >> compatibles from the machine driver. > > So this is the same hardware? Then no, we do not rename compatibles. The QCS8275 compatible snuck in before we concluded the pathway of renaming the SoC to reflect its actual name.. In this case, I think we'll just have to eat the cost and go with the existing compatible, because it's simply cosmetic. That said.. I'm a little confused why we're accepting SoC-compatibles as well as board-compatibles for soundcards (e.g. rb2, rb3gen2, 6940idp) in parallel.. is it with an intention that the SoC one is present in reference designs and therefore will be common? Konrad
On 10/09/2025 12:20, Konrad Dybcio wrote: > That said.. I'm a little confused why we're accepting SoC-compatibles > as well as board-compatibles for soundcards (e.g. rb2, rb3gen2, > 6940idp) in parallel.. is it with an intention that the SoC one is > present in reference designs and therefore will be common? "Sound card" here is partially a software or architectural construct. Basically bindings for the sound machine driver. There is no such thing as sound card on the device, there is bunch of audio-related components. That's why we assume that many boards of given SoC will use same sound card driver. Some boards might be also different so they have their own compatible... or they were added in different time. I don't have particular guidelines here, for me it is a bit blurry. Best regards, Krzysztof
On 9/10/2025 1:35 PM, Mohammad Rafi Shaik wrote: > > > On 9/10/2025 1:09 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 10/09/2025 09:26, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/ >>>> qcom,sm8250.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/ >>>> qcom,sm8250.yaml >>>> index 8ac91625dce5..eebf80c1d79a 100644 >>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/qcom,sm8250.yaml >>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/qcom,sm8250.yaml >>>> @@ -35,6 +35,7 @@ properties: >>>> - qcom,qcm6490-idp-sndcard >>>> - qcom,qcs6490-rb3gen2-sndcard >>>> - qcom,qcs8275-sndcard >>> >>> So what is the point of this compatible? There is no user of it and I >>> think you added QCS8275 for this case exactly... >>> >>> Shall I start reverting commits from Qualcomm because you post patches >>> "just in case" and turns out they are completely not needed? No single >>> user of such code? >> >> >> @Mark, >> >> In case it wasn't obvious, please do not merge the patch till we get >> some clarification. For sure it is wrong one way or another: either >> incomplete or just duplicated. >> > > The device tree currently uses qcs8275 as the sound compatible, and > the corresponding Device tree changes have already been applied and merged. > > Reverting this now would break the ABI. > > A new device tree patch with qcs8300 is currently under review: > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20250910044512.1369640-1- > mohammad.rafi.shaik@oss.qualcomm.com/ > > Once the machine driver and device tree patch with qcs8300 are accepted > and merged, > > I will promptly submit a cleanup patch to remove of discontinued > compatibles from the machine driver. If the above explanation is acceptable, please help with approvals. I will submit the cleanup patch to remove discontinued compatibles,once the qcs8300 support added in driver and device tree considering ABI should not break. Thanks & Regards, Rafi. > >> Best regards, >> Krzysztof >
On Fri, 05 Sep 2025 19:56:46 +0530, Mohammad Rafi Shaik wrote: > Add bindings for QCS8300 sound card, which looks fully > compatible with existing SM8250. > > Signed-off-by: Mohammad Rafi Shaik <mohammad.rafi.shaik@oss.qualcomm.com> > --- > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sound/qcom,sm8250.yaml | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > Acked-by: Rob Herring (Arm) <robh@kernel.org>
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.