[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51daddc4-1b86-4688-98cb-ef0f041d4126@mailbox.org>
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2025 12:30:51 +0200
From: Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@...lbox.org>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>, Peng Fan <peng.fan@....nxp.com>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>, Abel Vesa <abelvesa@...nel.org>,
Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>, Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
imx@...ts.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
E Shattow <e@...eshell.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] dts: arm64: freescale: move imx9*-clock.h
imx9*-power.h into dt-bindings
On 9/1/25 5:33 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 01/09/2025 04:22, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> On 9/1/25 5:22 AM, Peng Fan wrote:
>>> On Sun, Aug 31, 2025 at 01:04:45PM -0700, E Shattow wrote:
>>>> Move imx9*-{clock,power}.h headers into
>>>> include/dt-bindings/{clock,power}/ and fix up the DTs
>>>
>>> No. The files should be under arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/
>> Why ? Linux already has include/dt-bindings/clock/ and
>> include/dt-bindings/power directories for exactly those headers , why
>> did iMX9 suddenly start conflating them into arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale ?
>
>
> Because maybe these are not bindings?
Please compare arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx95-clock.h and
include/dt-bindings/clock/imx8mp-clock.h and clarify to me, why the
imx95-clock.h is not bindings and the imx8mp-clock.h is bindings.
Both files list clock IDs for the clock nodes, one clock one is SCMI
clock (iMX95), the other clock node is CCM clock (iMX8MP), and they are
both (SCMI and CCM) clock nodes in DT. Both header files may have to be
included in drivers, the iMX8MP headers already are, the iMX95 headers
currently are included only in U-Boot drivers.
I really don't see the difference here, sorry.
> Regardless whether you agree or
> not, the commit should clearly explain the reason behind.
Which commit ?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists