On 20/02/2024 17:19, Yang Xiwen wrote: > On 2/21/2024 12:13 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 20/02/2024 15:06, Yang Xiwen wrote: >>> On 2/20/2024 6:10 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>> On 17/02/2024 13:52, Yang Xiwen via B4 Relay wrote: >>>>> From: Yang Xiwen <forbidden405@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> >>>>> According to the datasheet, some clocks are missing, add their >>>>> definitions first. >>>>> >>>>> Some aliases for hi3798mv200 are also introduced. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Yang Xiwen <forbidden405@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> --- >>>>> include/dt-bindings/clock/histb-clock.h | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++ >>>>> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/clock/histb-clock.h b/include/dt-bindings/clock/histb-clock.h >>>>> index e64e5770ada6..68a53053586a 100644 >>>>> --- a/include/dt-bindings/clock/histb-clock.h >>>>> +++ b/include/dt-bindings/clock/histb-clock.h >>>>> @@ -58,6 +58,27 @@ >>>>> #define HISTB_USB3_UTMI_CLK1 48 >>>>> #define HISTB_USB3_PIPE_CLK1 49 >>>>> #define HISTB_USB3_SUSPEND_CLK1 50 >>>>> +#define HISTB_SDIO1_BIU_CLK 51 >>>>> +#define HISTB_SDIO1_CIU_CLK 52 >>>>> +#define HISTB_SDIO1_DRV_CLK 53 >>>>> +#define HISTB_SDIO1_SAMPLE_CLK 54 >>>>> +#define HISTB_ETH0_PHY_CLK 55 >>>>> +#define HISTB_ETH1_PHY_CLK 56 >>>>> +#define HISTB_WDG0_CLK 57 >>>>> +#define HISTB_USB2_UTMI0_CLK HISTB_USB2_UTMI_CLK >>>> Why? It's anyway placed oddly, the entries are ordered by number/value. >>> >>> So this is somewhat broken at the beginning. It named after >>> histb-clock.h but actually they are all clocks for Hi3798CV200 SoC. For >>> Hi3798MV200(also a HiSTB SoC), there is one additional UTMI clock. >>> >>> >>> What solution do you prefer? rename UTMI_CLK to UTMI0_CLK, add UTMI1_CLK >>> after it and increment all the indexes after it? Then the diff would be >>> very ugly. >> I still don't understand what is the problem you are trying to solve >> here. Your commit msg says add missing ID, but that ID - >> HISTB_USB2_UTMI_CLK - is already there. >> >> I also do not get why there is a need to rename anything. > > > Because there are two USB2_UTMI_CLKs in total, at least for Hi3798MV200. > UTMI1 is missing here. For other HiSTB SoCs, there could be even more. My comment was under UTMI0. We do not talk about UTMI1... > > > If we add USB2_UTMI1_CLK, it looks silly to keep USB2_UTMI_CLK without > renaming it to UTMI0. Just like all the other clocks. E.g. > I2Cn_CLK(n=0,1,2,3,4) etc.., so the same for USB2_UTMI_CLK. Then place it next to old name and explain why it is deprecated with comment. Best regards, Krzysztof
