[PATCH v2] dt-bindings: sram: qcom,imem: Document glymur as compatible

[PATCH v2] dt-bindings: sram: qcom,imem: Document glymur as compatible

[Ananthu C V]

Add compatible for Qualcomm's glymur IMEM.

Signed-off-by: Ananthu C V <ananthu.cv@oss.qualcomm.com>
---
V1->V2 alphabetically sorted the placement of glymur in the list
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sram/qcom,imem.yaml | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sram/qcom,imem.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sram/qcom,imem.yaml
index 6a627c57ae2f..5a4a2868388e 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sram/qcom,imem.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sram/qcom,imem.yaml
@@ -18,6 +18,7 @@ properties:
     items:
       - enum:
           - qcom,apq8064-imem
+          - qcom,glymur-imem
           - qcom,ipq5424-imem
           - qcom,msm8226-imem
           - qcom,msm8974-imem
-- 
2.43.0

Re: [PATCH v2] dt-bindings: sram: qcom,imem: Document glymur as compatible

[Kathiravan Thirumoorthy]

On 1/23/2026 3:46 PM, Ananthu C V wrote:
> Add compatible for Qualcomm's glymur IMEM.

Shouldn't we use "mmio-sram" binding? Please note, starting from 
"kaanapali", IMEM is described as "mmio-sram". If we need to stick with 
this binding, please describe the same on why so?

>
> Signed-off-by: Ananthu C V <ananthu.cv@oss.qualcomm.com>
> ---
> V1->V2 alphabetically sorted the placement of glymur in the list
> ---
>   Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sram/qcom,imem.yaml | 1 +
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sram/qcom,imem.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sram/qcom,imem.yaml
> index 6a627c57ae2f..5a4a2868388e 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sram/qcom,imem.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sram/qcom,imem.yaml
> @@ -18,6 +18,7 @@ properties:
>       items:
>         - enum:
>             - qcom,apq8064-imem
> +          - qcom,glymur-imem
>             - qcom,ipq5424-imem
>             - qcom,msm8226-imem
>             - qcom,msm8974-imem

Re: [PATCH v2] dt-bindings: sram: qcom,imem: Document glymur as compatible

[Ananthu C V]

On Sat, Jan 24, 2026 at 09:57:18PM +0530, Kathiravan Thirumoorthy wrote:
> 
> On 1/23/2026 3:46 PM, Ananthu C V wrote:
> > Add compatible for Qualcomm's glymur IMEM.
> 
> Shouldn't we use "mmio-sram" binding? Please note, starting from
> "kaanapali", IMEM is described as "mmio-sram". If we need to stick with this
> binding, please describe the same on why so?
> 

Great, thanks for this review. Initially Krzysztof also pointed out in v1 that
the placement is wrong (thanks Krzysztof). But I couldn't find internal docs
regarding this and since I missed out on sorting it, I thought that was the
wrong placement. I see that the kaanapali imem binding thread has sufficient
info on this, so I'll test with mmio-sram and make a revision if that works.