Document the QMP UFS PHY compatible for Qualcomm Hamoa to support
physical layer functionality for UFS found on the SoC. Use fallback to
indicate the compatibility of the QMP UFS PHY on the Hamoa with that
on the SM8550.

Signed-off-by: Pradeep P V K <pradeep.pragallapati@oss.qualcomm.com>
---
 .../devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,sc8280xp-qmp-ufs-phy.yaml    | 4 ++++
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,sc8280xp-qmp-ufs-phy.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,sc8280xp-qmp-ufs-phy.yaml
index fba7b2549dde..b501f76d8c53 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,sc8280xp-qmp-ufs-phy.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,sc8280xp-qmp-ufs-phy.yaml
@@ -28,6 +28,10 @@ properties:
           - enum:
               - qcom,kaanapali-qmp-ufs-phy
           - const: qcom,sm8750-qmp-ufs-phy
+      - items:
+          - enum:
+              - qcom,hamoa-qmp-ufs-phy
+          - const: qcom,sm8550-qmp-ufs-phy
       - enum:
           - qcom,msm8996-qmp-ufs-phy
           - qcom,msm8998-qmp-ufs-phy
-- 
2.34.1

On 12/29/25 7:06 AM, Pradeep P V K wrote:
> Document the QMP UFS PHY compatible for Qualcomm Hamoa to support
> physical layer functionality for UFS found on the SoC. Use fallback to
> indicate the compatibility of the QMP UFS PHY on the Hamoa with that
> on the SM8550.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Pradeep P V K <pradeep.pragallapati@oss.qualcomm.com>
> ---
>  .../devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,sc8280xp-qmp-ufs-phy.yaml    | 4 ++++
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,sc8280xp-qmp-ufs-phy.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,sc8280xp-qmp-ufs-phy.yaml
> index fba7b2549dde..b501f76d8c53 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,sc8280xp-qmp-ufs-phy.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,sc8280xp-qmp-ufs-phy.yaml
> @@ -28,6 +28,10 @@ properties:
>            - enum:
>                - qcom,kaanapali-qmp-ufs-phy
>            - const: qcom,sm8750-qmp-ufs-phy
> +      - items:
> +          - enum:
> +              - qcom,hamoa-qmp-ufs-phy
> +          - const: qcom,sm8550-qmp-ufs-phy

For platforms introduced before we were cleared to use chip codenames,
let's stay with the numerical identifiers for consistency (i.e. all other
compatibles in hamoa.dtsi say qcom,x1e80100-xyz)

Konrad

On 12/29/2025 5:56 PM, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> On 12/29/25 7:06 AM, Pradeep P V K wrote:
>> Document the QMP UFS PHY compatible for Qualcomm Hamoa to support
>> physical layer functionality for UFS found on the SoC. Use fallback to
>> indicate the compatibility of the QMP UFS PHY on the Hamoa with that
>> on the SM8550.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Pradeep P V K <pradeep.pragallapati@oss.qualcomm.com>
>> ---
>>   .../devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,sc8280xp-qmp-ufs-phy.yaml    | 4 ++++
>>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,sc8280xp-qmp-ufs-phy.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,sc8280xp-qmp-ufs-phy.yaml
>> index fba7b2549dde..b501f76d8c53 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,sc8280xp-qmp-ufs-phy.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,sc8280xp-qmp-ufs-phy.yaml
>> @@ -28,6 +28,10 @@ properties:
>>             - enum:
>>                 - qcom,kaanapali-qmp-ufs-phy
>>             - const: qcom,sm8750-qmp-ufs-phy
>> +      - items:
>> +          - enum:
>> +              - qcom,hamoa-qmp-ufs-phy
>> +          - const: qcom,sm8550-qmp-ufs-phy
> For platforms introduced before we were cleared to use chip codenames,
> let's stay with the numerical identifiers for consistency (i.e. all other
> compatibles in hamoa.dtsi say qcom,x1e80100-xyz)
sure, will update with x1e80100 accordingly.
>
> Konrad

On 29/12/2025 07:06, Pradeep P V K wrote:
> Document the QMP UFS PHY compatible for Qualcomm Hamoa to support
> physical layer functionality for UFS found on the SoC. Use fallback to
> indicate the compatibility of the QMP UFS PHY on the Hamoa with that
> on the SM8550.

Last sentence is pointless. You keep explaining what you did, but you
did not say why. Why Hamoa is compatible with SM8550, but not with SM8650?


Best regards,
Krzysztof

On 12/29/2025 12:41 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 29/12/2025 07:06, Pradeep P V K wrote:
>> Document the QMP UFS PHY compatible for Qualcomm Hamoa to support
>> physical layer functionality for UFS found on the SoC. Use fallback to
>> indicate the compatibility of the QMP UFS PHY on the Hamoa with that
>> on the SM8550.
> Last sentence is pointless. You keep explaining what you did, but you
> did not say why. Why Hamoa is compatible with SM8550, but not with SM8650?
i will update in my next patchset.
>
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof

On 30/12/2025 10:05, Pradeep Pragallapati wrote:
> 
> On 12/29/2025 12:41 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 29/12/2025 07:06, Pradeep P V K wrote:
>>> Document the QMP UFS PHY compatible for Qualcomm Hamoa to support
>>> physical layer functionality for UFS found on the SoC. Use fallback to
>>> indicate the compatibility of the QMP UFS PHY on the Hamoa with that
>>> on the SM8550.
>> Last sentence is pointless. You keep explaining what you did, but you
>> did not say why. Why Hamoa is compatible with SM8550, but not with SM8650?
> i will update in my next patchset.

Actually the problem is that you introduced completely new SoC name -
Hamoa - so that's why I was wondering. If you used correct name, X1E, it
would be more logical as it is basically SM8550.

But then follow up question - why are you duplicating existing patches?

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/20250814005904.39173-2-harrison.vanderbyl@gmail.com/

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/p3mhtj2rp6y2ezuwpd2gu7dwx5cbckfu4s4pazcudi4j2wogtr@4yecb2bkeyms/

Best regards,
Krzysztof