On 10/3/22 09:23, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On 03/10/2022 09:15, Michal Simek wrote:
And this is new IP. Not sure who has chosen similar name but this targets
Xilinx Versal SOCs. Origin one was targeting previous families.
Do we need a whole new schema doc?
It is completely new IP with different logic compare to origin one.
It is not ideal to define the same property, xlnx,nr-outputs, more than
once. And it's only a new compatible string.
I can't see any issue with using dt binding for xlnx,clocking-wizard.yaml
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/tree/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/xlnx,clocking-wizard.yaml
So we already have out of staging document:
devicetree/bindings/clock/xlnx,clocking-wizard.yaml
in 6.1 yes.
and author wants to add one more:
devicetree/bindings/clock/xlnx,clk-wizard.yaml
as I said it is completely different IP which requires complete different driver
but IP designers choose similar name which is out of developer control.
Shall we expect in two years, a third document like:
devicetree/bindings/clock/xlnx,clk-wzrd.yaml
?
Developer definitely doesn't know. If new SoC requires for the same purpose
different IP with completely different driver is something out of developer
control. As of today I am not aware about such a requirement and need and
personally I can just hope that if they need to do such a change they will be
able to keep current SW driver compatible with new HW IP.
also for this IP if that's fine with you.
Only xlnx,speed-grade can be defined for previous IP which is easy to mark.
That old binding also explained nr-outputs as "Number of outputs".
Perfect... :(
Anyway if description should be improved let's just do it. I just want to get
guidance if we should update current dt binding for similar IP or just create
new one as this one is trying to do.
Thanks,
Michal
