On 5/1/2024 5:36 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
On Wed, 1 May 2024 at 11:32, Satya Priya Kakitapalli <quic_skakitap@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:SM8150 videocc needs AHB clock, so update the bindings for sm8150 to add the AHB clock. Fixes: 35d26e9292e2 ("dt-bindings: clock: Add YAML schemas for the QCOM VIDEOCC clock bindings")The tag is incorrect. The mentioned commit didn't add sm8150 bindings, so it didn't have a bug.
Thanks, will correct the tag.
Signed-off-by: Satya Priya Kakitapalli <quic_skakitap@xxxxxxxxxxx> --- .../devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,videocc.yaml | 17 ++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,videocc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,videocc.yaml index 6999e36ace1b..68bac801adb0 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,videocc.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,videocc.yaml @@ -75,7 +75,6 @@ allOf: enum: - qcom,sc7180-videocc - qcom,sdm845-videocc - - qcom,sm8150-videocc then: properties: clocks: @@ -101,6 +100,22 @@ allOf: - const: bi_tcxo - const: bi_tcxo_ao + - if: + properties: + compatible: + enum: + - qcom,sm8150-videoccCould you please extend the sm8250 case instead of defining a new one? Also could you please check if there is a clock (like ahb_clk_src) that uses bi_tcxo_ao instead of bi_tcxo? If so, we have to add this clock to the bindings even if the driver doesn't use/model it at this point.
There are no clocks using the bi_tcxo_ao on sm8150. Hence added separate case for sm8150 instead of re-using sm8250.
+ then: + properties: + clocks: + items: + - description: AHB + - description: Board XO source + clock-names: + items: + - const: iface + - const: bi_tcxo + - if: properties: compatible: -- 2.25.1
