On 02/02/2024 23:20, David Lechner wrote: >>> >>> And this should be input clock. >>> >>>> + type: boolean >>>> + >>>> + adi,int-clock-output-enable: >>>> + description: | >>>> + Internal 4.92 MHz clock available on MCLK2 pin. >>>> + type: boolean >>> >>> This should be clock-cells and clock provider. >>> >>> Unless you are just documenting already used interface which you do not >>> want to break... > > This property is already used in the mainline Linux driver, so sounds > like the "don't want to break it" case. But it would make sense to > deprecate this property and use standard clock provider bindings > instead. One could think like that, but what type of process would it create? Send driver changes WITHOUT binding, then document whatever crap you have saying "Linux already supports it!". Whenever such argument is used, I am repeating the same. Let's be more clear: NAK if this is clock provider and the only argument is that someone sneaked undocumented interface bypassing review. Best regards, Krzysztof
