[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <36d71d033f6926dfaefed7010bced94b4cd4b339.camel@mediatek.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2022 08:18:51 +0000
From: Xiangsheng Hou (侯祥胜)
<Xiangsheng.Hou@...iatek.com>
To: "miquel.raynal@...tlin.com" <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
"robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
"krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org" <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
"broonie@...nel.org" <broonie@...nel.org>,
"krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org"
<krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
"matthias.bgg@...il.com" <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
"gch981213@...il.com" <gch981213@...il.com>,
"vigneshr@...com" <vigneshr@...com>,
"richard@....at" <richard@....at>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
Benliang Zhao (赵本亮)
<Benliang.Zhao@...iatek.com>,
"linux-spi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Bin Zhang (章斌) <bin.zhang@...iatek.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/9] dt-bindings: spi: mtk-snfi: add mt7986 IC snfi
bindings
Hi Krzysztof,
On Tue, 2022-11-29 at 08:47 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 29/11/2022 03:50, Xiangsheng Hou (侯祥胜) wrote:
> >
> > > > clocks:
> > > > + minItems: 2
> > > > items:
> > > > - description: clock used for the controller
> > > > - description: clock used for the SPI bus
> > > > + - description: clock used for the AHB bus dma bus, this
> > > > depends on
> > > > + hardware design, so this is optional.
> > >
> > > Optional for which variants? For all of them?
> >
> > It`s only needed for the item 3 nfi_hclk. Is it proper with this
> > description or any other suggestion.
>
> I understand third clock is optional. For which variants/compatibles
> it
> is optional? Add allOf:if:then restricting it.
The MediaTek SPI NAND controller IP used by MT7986 is the newest.
In the future, there will have other SoCs.
If add restricting on this, may not easy to maintain.
Does this acceptable?
Thanks
Xiangsheng Hou
Powered by blists - more mailing lists