From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Claude Code Review Bot <claude-review@example.com>
To: dri-devel-reviews@example.com
Subject: Claude review: dt-bindings: display: msm: qcm2290: Add Shikra MDSS
Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2026 11:45:50 +1000
Message-ID: <review-patch1-20260603-shikra-display-v1-1-aeac1b94faa7@oss.qualcomm.com>
In-Reply-To: <20260603-shikra-display-v1-1-aeac1b94faa7@oss.qualcomm.com>
References: <20260603-shikra-display-v1-0-aeac1b94faa7@oss.qualcomm.com> <20260603-shikra-display-v1-1-aeac1b94faa7@oss.qualcomm.com>
X-Mailer: Claude Code Patch Reviewer
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0

Patch Review

This patch updates three YAML binding files to accept Shikra compatibles al=
ongside QCM2290.

**Design concern =E2=80=94 fallback compatibles**: Since the cover letter s=
tates Shikra "reuses the same MDSS/DPU 6.5 hardware as QCM2290" with "the s=
ame register layout," the idiomatic DT approach for identical hardware is t=
o use fallback compatibles. For example, the MDSS binding would express:

```yaml
compatible:
  items:
    - enum:
        - qcom,shikra-mdss
    - const: qcom,qcm2290-mdss
```

This keeps Shikra's own compatible for future-proofing while allowing the d=
river to match on the existing `qcom,qcm2290-mdss` entry =E2=80=94 no drive=
r code changes needed. The same applies to the DPU and DSI controller compa=
tibles. DT maintainers (Krzysztof, Rob) typically prefer this pattern.

**qcom,qcm2290-mdss.yaml changes look correct**: The `select:` block is pro=
perly added to ensure the schema matches both compatible values. The `patte=
rnProperties` for DPU and DSI child nodes are correctly extended.

**DSI controller binding in dsi-controller-main.yaml**: Adding `qcom,shikra=
-dsi-ctrl` in alphabetical order is correct. The DSI node in the MDSS bindi=
ng properly pairs it with `qcom,mdss-dsi-ctrl` as fallback, which is consis=
tent with how other SoCs work.

**Nit**: The title update from "QCM220" to "QCM2290" is a good fix of a pre=
-existing typo, but mixing a typo fix into a feature patch is slightly unus=
ual. Not a blocker.

---
Generated by Claude Code Patch Reviewer