Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: arm: qcom: Document Eliza CQM and CQS EVK boards

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 16/05/2026 13:12, Abel Vesa wrote:
> On 26-05-16 12:37:03, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 16/05/2026 12:34, Abel Vesa wrote:
>>> On 26-05-16 11:59:37, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>> On Fri, May 15, 2026 at 02:13:31PM +0300, Abel Vesa wrote:
>>>>> Document the compatible strings for the Qualcomm Eliza CQM and CQS EVK
>>>>> boards. Both boards are built from a base board paired with a SoM which
>>>>> is populated with either CQ7790M or CQ7790S (Eliza variants), PMICs,
>>>>> LPDDR, eMMC and UFS.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml | 2 ++
>>>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> Heh, I noticed only after sending email - where is any user of that?
>>>>
>>>> I expressed it many times - we do not take bindings without users.
>>>
>>> Well, my intention for the DT patchset was to include the eliza-cqm-som.dtsi
>>> and eliza-cqm-ek.dts as well, basically having the eliza-cqm-som.dtsi
>>> include the eliza-cqs-som.dtsi and later on add the modem (and the rest
>>> of the CQM) in there.
>>>
>>> But then, I realized that I don't know exactly the differences between
>>> CQM and CQS, specifically the SoM related ones.
>>>
>>> So I decided to send without the CQM entirely.
>>
>> But it is not about CQM. There is no user of any of these - neither CQS
>> nor CQM.
> 
> I'm not sure I understand this one. Here is the CQS user:
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260515-eliza-dts-qcs-evk-v1-2-7169d78a33e1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/

Why is that posted separately? This breaks every practice we had,
including all my recent comments complains on internal chats and in
public to Nord, Shikra and IPQ upstreaming about grouping patches. :/


Best regards,
Krzysztof