The sc8180x video clock controller block is identical to that
of sm8150. Add a new compatible string for sc8180x videocc and
use sm8150 as fallback.

Signed-off-by: Satya Priya Kakitapalli <quic_skakitap@quicinc.com>
---
 .../devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,videocc.yaml    | 23 +++++++++++++---------
 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,videocc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,videocc.yaml
index 5f7738d6835c4ba999402e163fc85a07e3a47a5a..f4ff9acef9d5fd819bc72252de188b82f31daf88 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,videocc.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,videocc.yaml
@@ -23,13 +23,17 @@ description: |
 
 properties:
   compatible:
-    enum:
-      - qcom,sc7180-videocc
-      - qcom,sc7280-videocc
-      - qcom,sdm845-videocc
-      - qcom,sm6350-videocc
-      - qcom,sm8150-videocc
-      - qcom,sm8250-videocc
+    oneOf:
+      - enum:
+          - qcom,sc7180-videocc
+          - qcom,sc7280-videocc
+          - qcom,sdm845-videocc
+          - qcom,sm6350-videocc
+          - qcom,sm8150-videocc
+          - qcom,sm8250-videocc
+      - items:
+          - const: qcom,sc8180x-videocc
+          - const: qcom,sm8150-videocc
 
   clocks:
     minItems: 1
@@ -110,8 +114,9 @@ allOf:
   - if:
       properties:
         compatible:
-          enum:
-            - qcom,sm8150-videocc
+          contains:
+            enum:
+              - qcom,sm8150-videocc
     then:
       properties:
         clocks:

-- 
2.25.1

On 10/07/2025 15:00, Satya Priya Kakitapalli wrote:
> The sc8180x video clock controller block is identical to that
> of sm8150. Add a new compatible string for sc8180x videocc and
> use sm8150 as fallback.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Satya Priya Kakitapalli <quic_skakitap@quicinc.com>
> ---
>  .../devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,videocc.yaml    | 23 +++++++++++++---------
>  1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>


<form letter>
This is a friendly reminder during the review process.

It looks like you received a tag and forgot to add it.

If you do not know the process, here is a short explanation:
Please add Acked-by/Reviewed-by/Tested-by tags when posting new versions
of patchset, under or above your Signed-off-by tag, unless patch changed
significantly (e.g. new properties added to the DT bindings). Tag is
"received", when provided in a message replied to you on the mailing
list. Tools like b4 can help here. However, there's no need to repost
patches *only* to add the tags. The upstream maintainer will do that for
tags received on the version they apply.

Please read:
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.12-rc3/source/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst#L577

If a tag was not added on purpose, please state why and what changed.
</form letter>

Best regards,
Krzysztof

On 10/07/2025 15:27, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 10/07/2025 15:00, Satya Priya Kakitapalli wrote:
>> The sc8180x video clock controller block is identical to that
>> of sm8150. Add a new compatible string for sc8180x videocc and
>> use sm8150 as fallback.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Satya Priya Kakitapalli <quic_skakitap@quicinc.com>
>> ---
>>  .../devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,videocc.yaml    | 23 +++++++++++++---------
>>  1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> 
> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
> 
> 
> <form letter>
> This is a friendly reminder during the review process.
> 
> It looks like you received a tag and forgot to add it.

Apologies, wrong keyword. It is supposed to be this one:


---

<form letter>
This is an automated instruction, just in case, because many review tags
are being ignored. If you know the process, you can skip it (please do
not feel offended by me posting it here - no bad intentions intended).
If you do not know the process, here is a short explanation:

Please add Acked-by/Reviewed-by/Tested-by tags when posting new versions
of patchset, under or above your Signed-off-by tag, unless patch changed
significantly (e.g. new properties added to the DT bindings). Tag is
"received", when provided in a message replied to you on the mailing
list. Tools like b4 can help here. However, there's no need to repost
patches *only* to add the tags. The upstream maintainer will do that for
tags received on the version they apply.

Full context and explanation:
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.12-rc3/source/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst#L577
</form letter>


Best regards,
Krzysztof