On Wed, Jun 07, 2023 at 05:17:48PM +0530, Rohit Agarwal wrote: > Add compatible for EPSS CPUFREQ-HW on SDX75. > > Signed-off-by: Rohit Agarwal <quic_rohiagar@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.yaml | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.yaml > index a6b3bb8..866ed2d 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.yaml > @@ -36,6 +36,7 @@ properties: > - qcom,sa8775p-cpufreq-epss > - qcom,sc7280-cpufreq-epss > - qcom,sc8280xp-cpufreq-epss > + - qcom,sdx75-cpufreq-epss > - qcom,sm6375-cpufreq-epss > - qcom,sm8250-cpufreq-epss > - qcom,sm8350-cpufreq-epss This is a very basic question, not completely related to this patch. Apologies in advance. What is the rationale for adding a new soc string under compatible and using it in the new soc device tree? Is it meant for documentation purpose? i.e one know what all SoCs / boards supported by this device node. I ask this because, we don't add these compatible strings in the driver [1] which means there is not SoC specific handling and there is no module load assist (module alias matching by user space based on device presence). Thanks, Pavan
