Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Thu, 15 Dec 2022 20:47:46 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] arm64: dts: qcom: Add base QDU1000/QRU1000 IDP DTs | From | Dmitry Baryshkov <> |
| |
On 15/12/2022 19:56, Melody Olvera wrote: > > > On 12/15/2022 12:44 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 14/12/2022 19:59, Melody Olvera wrote: >>>>> + #clock-cells = <0>; >>>>> + }; >>>>> + >>>>> + sleep_clk: sleep-clk { >>>>> + compatible = "fixed-clock"; >>>>> + clock-frequency = <32000>; >>>>> + #clock-cells = <0>; >>>>> + }; >>>>> + >>>>> + pcie_0_pipe_clk: pcie-0-pipe-clk { >>>> Afaict these clocks are not referenced anywhere, so please skip them. >>> Yes, so I included them to be consistent with the bindings. They will be needed later; >>> should I still remove? >>> >> If they are not referenced anywhere, how is it consistent with bindings? >> Where do the bindings require defining such nodes? > > These bindings here: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20221118181826.28269-2-quic_molvera@quicinc.com/ > I believe you commented that we either have these clocks or we don't, correct? I added them to > the dt since these clocks exist and will be needed later when USB and PCIE nodes are added. > As Konrad noted, these technically belong in the PHYs, but I was told to put stub fixed > clocks instead here: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/2c8c4642-8aee-3da3-7698-5e08b4c5894d@linaro.org/ > > How is this to be handled? Should I remove the clocks from the dt and the bindings and add them > later when we need them? Do I leave stub clocks here with frequency 0 until needed? I am > very confused right now.
You were told to use stub clocks in the bindings, not in the dtsi file. You can use <0> in the dtsi instead.
> > Thanks, > Melody > >> >> Best regards, >> Krzysztof >> >
-- With best wishes Dmitry
|  |