On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 08:25:02AM +0530, Kuldeep Singh wrote: > On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 04:05:37PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 12:51:24PM +0530, Kuldeep Singh wrote: > > > Add missing minItems property to clocks in ARM pl022 bindings. > > > > > > This helps in resolving below warnings: > > > clocks: [[4]] is too short > > > clock-names: ['apb_pclk'] is too short > > > > Again, the error is in the dts files, not the schema. > > Rob, kindly note this series number is deprecated and I have sent v3 > version some time back. Here's the link: > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-spi/20220309171847.5345-1-singh.kuldeep87k@xxxxxxxxx/T/#u > > > > > > > There's 2 possible answers. First, both clock inputs use the same source > > clock. That's an easy fix. List the clock twice. Second, one clock is > > not described in DT or visible to s/w. It still has to be in the h/w and > > could be described as a 'fixed-clock'. A DT should either be all in with > > clocks or not use the clock binding IMO. Describing some clocks and not > > others is not a good solution. > > > > For example, let's look at bcm-cygnus as one of the single clock > > examples. The first thing I notice is there is a apb_pclk already > > defined. The pl330 uses it. The watchdog (also Primecell) lists the > > source clock twice. So what should pl022 be? IDK, ask the Broadcom > > folks. If they don't know, then list the source clock twice. That's > > effectively no change from what we have now. I just noticed not all platforms possessing single clock are raising 'dtbs_check' warning. For example, bcm-cygnus and lpc32xx passes check even though their DT clock entry has just "apb_pclk". Any reason why they pass successfully through checks? > > Yes, I took motivation from sp805 watchdog(primecell) while resolving DT > conflicts. I found LG and amd seattle platform with single clock in DT > for which I have sent patches. Link is below: > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/CAL_Jsq+k+ridWTkdy4xwTC7VxUTU8tu+Q2BA9kbQVA222PWvZw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > Moreover, I observed that clocks and clock-names are not required > properties for pl022. I am wondering reason behind the same when you > first made changes. Any specific reason not adding them which I am not > aware of or it just got missed? > > - Kuldeep
