J722S uses the C7xv DSP based deep learning engine similar to AM62A,
but the reset and module enable integration in the SoC is little
different. It does not have local reset from power state controller.
So, add a new compatible string to distinguish this difference.

Signed-off-by: Hari Nagalla <hnagalla@ti.com>
Reviewed-by: Devarsh Thakkar <devarsht@ti.com>
---
 .../devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-dsp-rproc.yaml        | 3 +++
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-dsp-rproc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-dsp-rproc.yaml
index b51bb863d759..c241d88f640b 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-dsp-rproc.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-dsp-rproc.yaml
@@ -29,11 +29,13 @@ properties:
   compatible:
     enum:
       - ti,am62a-c7xv-dsp
+      - ti,j722s-c7xv-dsp
       - ti,j721e-c66-dsp
       - ti,j721e-c71-dsp
       - ti,j721s2-c71-dsp
     description:
       Use "ti,am62a-c7xv-dsp" for AM62A Deep learning DSPs on K3 AM62A SoCs
+      Use "ti,j722s-c7xv-dsp" for J722S Deep learning DSPs on K3 J722S SoCs
       Use "ti,j721e-c66-dsp" for C66x DSPs on K3 J721E SoCs
       Use "ti,j721e-c71-dsp" for C71x DSPs on K3 J721E SoCs
       Use "ti,j721s2-c71-dsp" for C71x DSPs on K3 J721S2 SoCs
@@ -127,6 +129,7 @@ allOf:
         compatible:
           enum:
             - ti,am62a-c7xv-dsp
+            - ti,j722s-c7xv-dsp
     then:
       properties:
         reg:
-- 
2.34.1

On Thu, Feb 12, 2026 at 06:11:48PM -0600, Hari Nagalla wrote:
> J722S uses the C7xv DSP based deep learning engine similar to AM62A,
> but the reset and module enable integration in the SoC is little
> different. It does not have local reset from power state controller.
> So, add a new compatible string to distinguish this difference.

This does not explain lack of compatibility. You ALWAYS add new
compatible string. ALWAYS. Drop the last sentence and fix the patch.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Hari Nagalla <hnagalla@ti.com>
> Reviewed-by: Devarsh Thakkar <devarsht@ti.com>
> ---
>  .../devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-dsp-rproc.yaml        | 3 +++
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-dsp-rproc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-dsp-rproc.yaml
> index b51bb863d759..c241d88f640b 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-dsp-rproc.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/ti,k3-dsp-rproc.yaml
> @@ -29,11 +29,13 @@ properties:
>    compatible:
>      enum:
>        - ti,am62a-c7xv-dsp
> +      - ti,j722s-c7xv-dsp

721 < 722

>        - ti,j721e-c66-dsp
>        - ti,j721e-c71-dsp
>        - ti,j721s2-c71-dsp
>      description:
>        Use "ti,am62a-c7xv-dsp" for AM62A Deep learning DSPs on K3 AM62A SoCs
> +      Use "ti,j722s-c7xv-dsp" for J722S Deep learning DSPs on K3 J722S SoCs

Same here

>        Use "ti,j721e-c66-dsp" for C66x DSPs on K3 J721E SoCs
>        Use "ti,j721e-c71-dsp" for C71x DSPs on K3 J721E SoCs
>        Use "ti,j721s2-c71-dsp" for C71x DSPs on K3 J721S2 SoCs
> @@ -127,6 +129,7 @@ allOf:
>          compatible:
>            enum:
>              - ti,am62a-c7xv-dsp
> +            - ti,j722s-c7xv-dsp
>      then:
>        properties:
>          reg:
> -- 
> 2.34.1
>

On 13/02/2026 09:13, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 12, 2026 at 06:11:48PM -0600, Hari Nagalla wrote:
>> J722S uses the C7xv DSP based deep learning engine similar to AM62A,
>> but the reset and module enable integration in the SoC is little
>> different. It does not have local reset from power state controller.
>> So, add a new compatible string to distinguish this difference.
> 
> This does not explain lack of compatibility. You ALWAYS add new
> compatible string. ALWAYS. Drop the last sentence and fix the patch.
> 


And by "fix" I meant express compatibility or explain better why local
reset is different than resets property, which applies to new device.
The entire picture made by commit msg and existing binding is just very
confusing.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

On 2/13/26 03:34, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> This does not explain lack of compatibility. You ALWAYS add new
>> compatible string. ALWAYS. Drop the last sentence and fix the patch.
>>
> 
> And by "fix" I meant express compatibility or explain better why local
> reset is different than resets property, which applies to new device.
> The entire picture made by commit msg and existing binding is just very
> confusing.
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
> 
Understood. Thanks for the review. I'll submit a v2 with a better 
explanation of the local reset vs resets property distinction.

Best Regards,
Hari