Quoting Jonathan Marek (2021-06-04 10:25:41)

On 6/2/21 5:27 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:

quoted

Quoting Jonathan Marek (2021-05-18 17:18:02)

quoted

Add sm8350 DISPCC bindings, which are simply a symlink to the sm8250
bindings. Update the documentation with the new compatible.

Signed-off-by: Jonathan Marek <redacted>
Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
---
  .../devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,dispcc-sm8x50.yaml       | 6 ++++--
  include/dt-bindings/clock/qcom,dispcc-sm8350.h              | 1 +

quoted

  2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
  create mode 120000 include/dt-bindings/clock/qcom,dispcc-sm8350.h

Why the symlink? Can we have the dt authors use the existing header file
instead?

It would be strange to include bindings with the name of a different 
SoC. I guess it is a matter a preference, is there any good reason to 
*not* do it like this?

 $ find include/dt-bindings -type l
 include/dt-bindings/input/linux-event-codes.h
 include/dt-bindings/clock/qcom,dispcc-sm8150.h

It seems to not be common at all.

quoted

quoted

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,dispcc-sm8x50.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,dispcc-sm8x50.yaml
index 0cdf53f41f84..8f414642445e 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,dispcc-sm8x50.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,dispcc-sm8x50.yaml

@@ -4,24 +4,26 @@
  $id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/clock/qcom,dispcc-sm8x50.yaml#
  $schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
  
-title: Qualcomm Display Clock & Reset Controller Binding for SM8150/SM8250
+title: Qualcomm Display Clock & Reset Controller Binding for SM8150/SM8250/SM8350

Maybe just "Binding for SM8x50 SoCs"

Its likely these bindings won't be compatible with future "SM8x50" SoCs, 
listing supported SoCs explicitly will avoid confusion in the future.

The yaml file has sm8x50 in the name. What's the plan there?