Are the Cholas Shaivites or descendants of the Solar Dynasty (Suryavamsha)?

Are the Cholas Shaivites or descendants of the Solar Dynasty (Suryavamsha)? Many people in Kerala claim that the Chola kings were Shaivites. Likewise, they also claim that the Satavahana kings were Shudras.

The Satavahana kings may have been descendants of the Vishwakarma Manu lineage. That may be why they were referred to as Shudras. In addition, history says that they married women from the Angirasa Gotra.

History says ancestors of shathavaa kings came from the administrative of mourya kings

Yes, many historians believe that the early ancestors of the Satavahana dynasty were associated with the administration of the Maurya Empire before establishing their own kingdom.

The evidence is indirect rather than definitive:

After the decline of the Maurya Empire (around the 2nd century BCE), the Satavahanas emerged in the Deccan.

Some historians suggest that the founders of the Satavahana dynasty may have served as Mauryan provincial governors, military officers, or local administrators in the Deccan.

Once Mauryan central authority weakened, they became independent rulers under Simuka, who is generally regarded as the founder of the Satavahana dynasty.

The Vishwakarma Manu lineage also had marital alliances with the Angirasa Gotra. Therefore, the Satavahanas should be regarded as Solar Dynasty (Suryavamsha) kings. The Satavahanas also maintained good relations with the Cholas. The Cholas themselves claimed that they were descendants of the Solar Dynasty.

Does worshipping Shiva automatically make someone a Shaivite? How is that so? The forms of the eleven Rudras, who are described as the sons of Kashyapa Prajapati, are present in every Chola temple.