On 10/02/2021 19.19, Tony Lindgren wrote:
* Hector Martin 'marcan' <marcan@xxxxxxxxx> [210208 12:05]:
On 08/02/2021 20.04, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
...
+ clk24: clk24 {
Just "clock". Node names should be generic.
Really? Almost every other device device tree uses unique clock node names.
Yeah please just use generic node name "clock". FYI, we're still hurting
because of this for the TI clock node names years after because the drivers
got a chance to rely on the clock node name..
Using "clock" means your clock driver code won't get a chance to wrongly
use the node name and you avoid similar issues.
That means it'll end up like this (so that we can have more than one
fixed-clock):
clocks {
#address-cells = <1>;
#size-cells = <0>;
clk123: clock@0 {
...
reg = <0>
}
clk456: clock@1 {
...
reg = <1>
}
}
Correct?
Incidentally, there is just one example in the kernel tree of doing this
right (in arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6qdl-tx6.dtsi). All the others that use
non-mmio clocks called `clock`, including the various tegra devicetrees,
violate the DT spec by not including a dummy reg property matching the
unit-address.
--
Hector Martin (marcan@xxxxxxxxx)
Public Key: https://mrcn.st/pub
