[PATCH 2/3] clk: sophgo: Add support for newly added precise compatible

[Conor Dooley]

On Wed, Apr 30, 2025 at 10:09:30AM +0800, Inochi Amaoto wrote:
> Add of device id definition for newly added precise compatible.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Inochi Amaoto <inochiama at gmail.com>
> ---
>  drivers/clk/sophgo/clk-cv1800.c | 3 +++
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/sophgo/clk-cv1800.c b/drivers/clk/sophgo/clk-cv1800.c
> index e0c4dc347579..e10221df6385 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/sophgo/clk-cv1800.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/sophgo/clk-cv1800.c
> @@ -1519,8 +1519,11 @@ static int cv1800_clk_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  
>  static const struct of_device_id cv1800_clk_ids[] = {
>  	{ .compatible = "sophgo,cv1800-clk", .data = &cv1800_desc },
> +	{ .compatible = "sophgo,cv1800b-clk", .data = &cv1800_desc },

Given the same data is used here, should there not be fallbacks in the
dt for some of these? For example, 1812 to 1800? Or is that not okay,
because 1800 is not a real device id?

>  	{ .compatible = "sophgo,cv1810-clk", .data = &cv1810_desc },
> +	{ .compatible = "sophgo,cv1812h-clk", .data = &cv1800_desc },
>  	{ .compatible = "sophgo,sg2000-clk", .data = &sg2000_desc },
> +	{ .compatible = "sophgo,sg2002-clk", .data = &sg2000_desc },
>  	{ }
>  };
>  MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, cv1800_clk_ids);
> -- 
> 2.49.0
> 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 228 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-riscv/attachments/20250430/1ff3b850/attachment.sig>