[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20260128-uncivil-precut-84f8e37b7f2c@spud>
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2026 14:40:13 +0000
From: Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: Michal Simek <michal.simek@....com>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
Abdurrahman Hussain <abdurrahman@...thop.ai>,
Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, info@...ean-labs.com,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/7] dt-bindings: i2c: xiic: make clocks optional
On Wed, Jan 28, 2026 at 03:34:02PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 28, 2026 at 12:21:41PM +0100, Michal Simek wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 1/28/26 11:37, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 27, 2026 at 09:03:55PM +0000, Abdurrahman Hussain wrote:
> > > > The xiic driver is designed to operate without explicit clock configuration
> > >
> > > And if you change this in the driver, then you change bindings?
> > >
> > > You miss here explanation based on hardware - how does the hardware work
> > > if nothing ticks it clocks?
> >
> > Hardware obviously have clock input which needs to be connected. Without it
> > it won't work.
>
> Should ACPI potential limitations be making the DT description less
> accurate?
We absolutely should not be cocking up bindings because ACPI requires
less complete descriptions.
> Would it not be better that the driver has an DT binding and an ACPI
> binding? Where there are common properties, common functions can be
> used to retrieve them. However, if ACPI lacks usable clocks, use the
> of_ method to get the clock from DT, and skip it for ACPI.
>
> Andrew
>
>
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists