[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAL_JsqL8N+h7bciDt=4fMHyAP=DL=YikpaTh2v4q383XVXH2AA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2021 14:20:48 -0500
From: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To: Kunihiko Hayashi <hayashi.kunihiko@...ionext.com>
Cc: Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
linux-clk <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] dt-bindings: clock: uniphier: Add clock binding
for SoC-glue
On Thu, Oct 7, 2021 at 3:50 AM Kunihiko Hayashi
<hayashi.kunihiko@...ionext.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Rob,
>
> On 2021/10/07 4:49, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 06, 2021 at 08:09:14PM +0900, Kunihiko Hayashi wrote:
> >> Update binding document for clocks implemented in SoC-glue.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Kunihiko Hayashi <hayashi.kunihiko@...ionext.com>
> >> ---
> >> .../bindings/clock/socionext,uniphier-clock.yaml | 16
> > ++++++++++++++++
> >> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git
> > a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/socionext,uniphier-clock.yaml
> > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/socionext,uniphier-clock.yaml
> >> index ee8d16a8019e..05a9d1f89756 100644
> >> ---
> > a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/socionext,uniphier-clock.yaml
> >> +++
> > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/socionext,uniphier-clock.yaml
> >> @@ -46,6 +46,9 @@ properties:
> >> - socionext,uniphier-ld20-peri-clock
> >> - socionext,uniphier-pxs3-peri-clock
> >> - socionext,uniphier-nx1-peri-clock
> >> + - description: SoC-glue clock
> >> + enum:
> >> + - socionext,uniphier-pro4-sg-clock
> >>
> >> "#clock-cells":
> >> const: 1
> >> @@ -95,3 +98,16 @@ examples:
> >>
> >> // other nodes ...
> >> };
> >> +
> >> + - |
> >> + soc-glue@...00000 {
> >> + compatible = "socionext,uniphier-sysctrl", "simple-mfd",
> > "syscon";
> >> + reg = <0x5f800000 0x2000>;
> >> +
> >> + clock {
> >> + compatible = "socionext,uniphier-pro4-sg-clock";
> >> + #clock-cells = <1>;
> >> + };
> >> +
> >> + // other nodes ...
> >> + };
> >
> > What's the value of this 2nd example? It's just a different compatible
> > string.
> Following the previous three examples in the document, it describes the
> difference between the parent nodes that place the clock.
>
> They are common to be child nodes of "syscon", and the definition of the
> parent node is not in this document.
> Should I put them together in a common example?
I'd just drop the example.
Rob
Powered by blists - more mailing lists