On 23/09/2023 17:00, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote: > Move the various camcc yaml files into one. The Camera Clock Controller > is pretty similar from SoC to SoC. > > Mostly we have some SoCs which require fewer clocks than others. In some > cases we have SoCs which have required-opps and required-power-domains. > > It is likely we could and should extend the thin CAMCC descriptions such > as sdm845 an sm6350 to the more robust descriptions such as sm8250 and > sm8450. > > As a result of listing sm8250 and sm8450 together required-opps and > power-domains become required for sm8250, which is a NOP for the dtsi > since both declarations already exist for sm8250. > > sm8250 is also chosen as the example for the new combined camcc.yaml. > > A minor tweak to fix Bjorn's email address in the Maintainer list is > included. > > Signed-off-by: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@xxxxxxxxxx> No, that's not the right approach. For GCC and CamCC and all other Qualcomm clock controllers, we split into device schemas, not merge into one. The one schema is just becoming unreviewable over time with multiple if:then clauses. Please use approach like we have for GCC, RPMh interconnects or remote proc loaders - common file. What's more, here you probably don't even need common file because it is already there - qcom,gcc.yaml Best regards, Krzysztof
