On 08/03/2021 18.21, Rob Herring wrote: > On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 03:14:10PM +0100, Rasmus Villemoes wrote: >> While a ripple counter can not usually be interfaced with (directly) >> from software, it may still be a crucial component in a board >> layout. To prevent its input clock from being disabled by the clock >> core because it apparently has no consumer, one needs to be able to >> represent that consumer in DT. > > I'm okay with this as it is describing h/w, but we already > 'protected-clocks' property which should work. Hm. Unless https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200903040015.5627-2-samuel@xxxxxxxxxxxx/ gets merged, I don't see how this would work out-of-the-box. Note that I sent a completely different v2, which made the gpio-wdt the clock consumer based on feedback from Guenter and Arnd, but that v2 isn't suitable for our case because it post-poned handling of the watchdog till after i2c is ready, which is too late. Somewhat similar to https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210222171247.97609-2-sebastian.reichel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/ it seems. >> + >> +Required properties: >> +- compatible: Must be "linux,ripple-ctr". > > Nothing linux specific about this. True, but I was following the lead of the existing gpio-wdt binding. Is there some other "vendor" name one can and should use for completely generic and simple components like these? "generic"? Rasmus
