On Tue, Mar 07, 2023 at 02:13:53PM +0100, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>
>
> On 7.03.2023 02:22, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> > While it was introduced in bindings, requiring a core clock, and added
> > into the DT, this compatible was apparently forgotten about on the driver
> > side of things. Fix it.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/firmware/qcom_scm.c | 1 +
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm.c b/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm.c
> > index 916a0c2fc903..2e8961c84b68 100644
> > --- a/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm.c
> > +++ b/drivers/firmware/qcom_scm.c
> > @@ -1494,6 +1494,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id qcom_scm_dt_match[] = {
> > },
> > { .compatible = "qcom,scm-msm8994" },
> > { .compatible = "qcom,scm-msm8996" },
> > + { .compatible = "qcom,scm-sm6375", .data = (void *)SCM_HAS_CORE_CLK },
> On a second thought, maybe the qcom,scm compatible could optionally consume
> all three clocks with schema guarding how many should be used, to prevent
> having to add nonsensical compatibles?
>
I've picked the patch, but your suggestion is not a bad idea. Back when
this scheme was decided there was no binding validation...
Regards,
Bjorn
> Konrad
> > { .compatible = "qcom,scm" },
> > {}
> > };
