[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2956d10b-d2cf-4019-adc8-d8053e435767@lechnology.com>
Date: Fri, 24 May 2024 15:50:32 -0500
From: David Lechner <david@...hnology.com>
To: Judith Mendez <jm@...com>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Catalin Marinas
<catalin.marinas@....com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
William Breathitt Gray <william.gray@...aro.org>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>, Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/8] dt-bindings: counter: Add new ti,am62-eqep
compatible
On 5/23/24 6:15 PM, Judith Mendez wrote:
> Add new compatible ti,am62-eqep for TI K3 devices. If a device
> uses this compatible, require power-domains property.
>
> Since there is only one functional and interface clock for eqep,
> clock-names is not really required. The clock-name also changed
> for TI K3 SoCs so make clock-names optional for the new compatible
> since there is only one clock that is routed to the IP.
>
> While we are here, add an example using ti,am62-eqep compatible.
>
> Signed-off-by: Judith Mendez <jm@...com>
> ---
> Changes since v1:
> - Fix eqep binding for new compatible, require
> power-domains for new compatible
> ---
> .../devicetree/bindings/counter/ti-eqep.yaml | 53 +++++++++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 48 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/counter/ti-eqep.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/counter/ti-eqep.yaml
> index 85f1ff83afe72..c4bb0231f166a 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/counter/ti-eqep.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/counter/ti-eqep.yaml
> @@ -11,7 +11,9 @@ maintainers:
>
> properties:
> compatible:
> - const: ti,am3352-eqep
> + enum:
> + - ti,am3352-eqep
> + - ti,am62-eqep
>
> reg:
> maxItems: 1
> @@ -21,19 +23,43 @@ properties:
> maxItems: 1
>
> clocks:
> - description: The clock that determines the SYSCLKOUT rate for the eQEP
> - peripheral.
> + description: The functional and interface clock that determines the clock
> + rate for the eQEP peripheral.
> maxItems: 1
>
> clock-names:
> - const: sysclkout
> + enum:
> + - sysclkout
> + - fck
> +
If we are making this optional for ti,am62-eqep, why add a new name?
Also, we could change the description to say that sysclockout is not a
great name but is required for backwards compatibility.
> + power-domains:
> + maxItems: 1
> +
> +allOf:
> + - if:
> + properties:
> + compatible:
> + contains:
> + enum:
> + - ti,am3352-eqep
> + then:
> + required:
> + - clock-names
What if we just add
else:
clock-names: false
since there is only one clock and not worry about the name?
> + - if:
> + properties:
> + compatible:
> + contains:
> + enum:
> + - ti,am62-eqep
> + then:
> + required:
> + - power-domains
>
> required:
> - compatible
> - reg
> - interrupts
> - clocks
> - - clock-names
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists