Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] dt-bindings: clk: intel: Add bindings document & header file for CGU

[Stephen Boyd <sboyd@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Quoting Rahul Tanwar (2019-12-19 19:31:08)
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/intel,cgu-lgm.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/intel,cgu-lgm.yaml
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..2c9edabe0490
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/intel,cgu-lgm.yaml
> @@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
> +%YAML 1.2
> +---
> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/bindings/clock/intel,cgu-lgm.yaml#
> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
> +
> +title: Intel Lightning Mountain SoC's Clock Controller(CGU) Binding
> +
> +maintainers:
> +  - Rahul Tanwar <rahul.tanwar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> +
> +description: |
> +  Lightning Mountain(LGM) SoC's Clock Generation Unit(CGU) driver provides
> +  all means to access the CGU hardware module in order to generate a series
> +  of clocks for the whole system and individual peripherals.
> +
> +  This binding uses the common clock bindings
> +  [1] Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/clock-bindings.txt

I don't know if this second paragraph is very useful.

> +
> +properties:
> +  compatible:
> +    const: intel,cgu-lgm
> +
> +  reg:
> +    maxItems: 1
> +
> +  '#clock-cells':
> +    const: 1
> +
> +required:
> +  - compatible
> +  - reg
> +  - '#clock-cells'
> +
> +examples:
> +  - |
> +    cgu: cgu@e0200000 {

Node name should be 'clock-controller'

> +        compatible = "intel,cgu-lgm";
> +        reg = <0xe0200000 0x33c>;
> +        #clock-cells = <1>;
> +    };
> +
> +...
> diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/clock/intel,lgm-clk.h b/include/dt-bindings/clock/intel,lgm-clk.h
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..09e5dc59ff5b
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/include/dt-bindings/clock/intel,lgm-clk.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,150 @@
> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */

Can this be more than just GPL? Maybe GPL or BSD?

[...]
> +
> +#define CLK_NR_CLKS            180

Can this be removed from the binding file? It's too generic of a name
regardless and it doesn't describe something that is actually part of
the binding.