On 16.07.2024 11:13 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > The display clock controller indices for SM8650 and SM8550 are > completely equal. Replace the header file for qcom,sm8650-dispcc with > the symlink to the qcom,sm8550-dispcc header file. > > Signed-off-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/clk/qcom/dispcc-sm8550.c | 2 +- > include/dt-bindings/clock/qcom,sm8650-dispcc.h | 103 +------------------------ > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 103 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/clk/qcom/dispcc-sm8550.c b/drivers/clk/qcom/dispcc-sm8550.c > index 78e11eade2ea..9ffcd9eb9283 100644 > --- a/drivers/clk/qcom/dispcc-sm8550.c > +++ b/drivers/clk/qcom/dispcc-sm8550.c > @@ -1776,7 +1776,7 @@ static int disp_cc_sm8550_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > } > > if (of_device_is_compatible(pdev->dev.of_node, "qcom,sm8650-dispcc")) { > - lucid_ole_vco.max_freq = 2100000000; > + lucid_ole_vco[0].max_freq = 2100000000; > disp_cc_mdss_mdp_clk_src.freq_tbl = ftbl_disp_cc_mdss_mdp_clk_src_sm8650; Remember to also account for the review comments from Neil regarding parents Konrad