Previous "qcom,oryon" is too generic, add specific cpu bindings:
qcom,oryon-gen1 for X1E80100, qcom,oryon-gen2 for SM8750, qcom,oryon-gen3
for Kaanapali.

Signed-off-by: Jingyi Wang <jingyi.wang@oss.qualcomm.com>
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cpus.yaml | 3 +++
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cpus.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cpus.yaml
index 736b7ab1bd0a..cc7e8fd4d652 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cpus.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/cpus.yaml
@@ -218,6 +218,9 @@ properties:
       - qcom,kryo685
       - qcom,kryo780
       - qcom,oryon
+      - qcom,oryon-gen1
+      - qcom,oryon-gen2
+      - qcom,oryon-gen3
       - qcom,scorpion
       - samsung,mongoose-m2
       - samsung,mongoose-m3

---
base-commit: 2666975a8905776d306bee01c5d98a0395bda1c9
change-id: 20251118-oryon-binding-497637bb0647

Best regards,
-- 
Jingyi Wang <jingyi.wang@oss.qualcomm.com>

On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 09:50:53PM -0800, Jingyi Wang wrote:
> Previous "qcom,oryon" is too generic, add specific cpu bindings:

Why is too generic? Why gen1/2/3 is not generic? Both sound exactly the
same for me - arbitrary number incremented from 1 does not make it less
generic.

> qcom,oryon-gen1 for X1E80100, qcom,oryon-gen2 for SM8750, qcom,oryon-gen3
> for Kaanapali.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jingyi Wang <jingyi.wang@oss.qualcomm.com>

Best regards,
Krzysztof

On 11/20/2025 4:24 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 09:50:53PM -0800, Jingyi Wang wrote:
>> Previous "qcom,oryon" is too generic, add specific cpu bindings:
> 
> Why is too generic? Why gen1/2/3 is not generic? Both sound exactly the
> same for me - arbitrary number incremented from 1 does not make it less
> generic.

This is align the qualcomm announced cpu information, there is no other
more information revealed publicly. The reference is from [1].
For me, it is likely the generation numbers information is having more
information compare to "qcom,oryon". And the current patch is to be
address the comments like [2]. What's your specific suggestion on this pls?

[1]
https://www.qualcomm.com/smartphones/products/8-series/snapdragon-8-elite-gen-5
[2]
https://lore.kernel.org/all/2960a6fc-106b-4280-b4d4-9c1a3a449454@oss.qualcomm.com/

> 
>> qcom,oryon-gen1 for X1E80100, qcom,oryon-gen2 for SM8750, qcom,oryon-gen3
>> for Kaanapali.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jingyi Wang <jingyi.wang@oss.qualcomm.com>
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
> 


-- 
Thx and BRs,
Aiqun(Maria) Yu

On 20/11/2025 09:50, Aiqun(Maria) Yu wrote:
> On 11/20/2025 4:24 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 09:50:53PM -0800, Jingyi Wang wrote:
>>> Previous "qcom,oryon" is too generic, add specific cpu bindings:
>>
>> Why is too generic? Why gen1/2/3 is not generic? Both sound exactly the
>> same for me - arbitrary number incremented from 1 does not make it less
>> generic.
> 
> This is align the qualcomm announced cpu information, there is no other
> more information revealed publicly. The reference is from [1].
> For me, it is likely the generation numbers information is having more
> information compare to "qcom,oryon". And the current patch is to be
> address the comments like [2]. What's your specific suggestion on this pls?

There is no context in this commit msg and patch is sent completely
without users, so how anyone can guess above?

The original compatible was never acked by any DT maintainers. What's
more Konrad raised objections to it at v1 (!!!) 2 years ago and provided
the answer what is expected.

It is not my task to dig old thread like that, because it is not me who
proposes this patch.

You are doing it for some reason, so you must come with the background
and the rationale.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

On 20/11/2025 10:00, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 20/11/2025 09:50, Aiqun(Maria) Yu wrote:
>> On 11/20/2025 4:24 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 09:50:53PM -0800, Jingyi Wang wrote:
>>>> Previous "qcom,oryon" is too generic, add specific cpu bindings:
>>>
>>> Why is too generic? Why gen1/2/3 is not generic? Both sound exactly the
>>> same for me - arbitrary number incremented from 1 does not make it less
>>> generic.
>>
>> This is align the qualcomm announced cpu information, there is no other
>> more information revealed publicly. The reference is from [1].
>> For me, it is likely the generation numbers information is having more
>> information compare to "qcom,oryon". And the current patch is to be
>> address the comments like [2]. What's your specific suggestion on this pls?
> 
> There is no context in this commit msg and patch is sent completely
> without users, so how anyone can guess above?
> 
> The original compatible was never acked by any DT maintainers. What's
> more Konrad raised objections to it at v1 (!!!) 2 years ago and provided
> the answer what is expected.
> 
> It is not my task to dig old thread like that, because it is not me who
> proposes this patch.
> 
> You are doing it for some reason, so you must come with the background
> and the rationale.
> 


For the context here was Konrad's request:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/b165d2cd-e8da-4f6d-9ecf-14df2b803614@linaro.org/

Best regards,
Krzysztof