Hey Krzysztof, On Sat, Feb 18, 2023 at 11:20:30AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 17/02/2023 17:27, Conor Dooley wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 04:47:48PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >> On 17/02/2023 14:32, Conor Dooley wrote: > >>>>>> Yes, it is. > >>>>> > >>>>> Which would then make GMAC1 RGMII RX optional, rather than required? > >>>> > >>>> If thinking in this way, I must say yes, it is optional. But actually > >>>> GMAC1 RGMII RX feeds gmac1_rx by default. > >>>> For a mux, it usually works if you populate only one input to it. > >>>> Does it mean all the other inputs are optional? And how can we define > >>>> which input is required? > >>> > >>> I'm not sure, that is a question for Krzysztof and/or Rob. > >> > >> That's a long thread, please summarize what you ask. Otherwise I have no > >> clue what is the question. > > > > Sorry. I tried to preserve the context of the conversation the last time > > I cropped it so that things would be contained on one email. > > > > For me at least, I am wondering how you convey that out of a list of > > clock inputs (for example a, b, c, d) that two of the clocks are inputs > > to a mux and it is only required to provide one of the two (say b & c). You skipped this part which was what I was trying to ask you about. Do you know how to convey this situation, or is it even possible to express those rules? > >> Does the mux works correctly if clock input is not connected? I mean, > >> are you now talking about real hardware or some simplification from SW > >> point of view? > > > > I'm coming at this from an angle of "is a StarFive customer going to show > > up with a devicetree containing dummy fixed-clocks to satisfy dtbs_check > > because they opted to only populate one input to the mux". > > I don't really care about implications for the driver, just about > > whether the hardware allows for inputs to the mux to be left > > un-populated. > > Whether hardware allows - not a question to me. > BTW, this is rather question coming from me... I don't understand what you mean by this, sorry. Thanks, Conor.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
