On 05/08/2024 18:22, Yao Zi wrote: > On Mon, Aug 05, 2024 at 01:47:45PM +0200, Heiko Stübner wrote: >> Am Montag, 5. August 2024, 13:37:11 CEST schrieb Dragan Simic: >>> On 2024-08-05 12:59, Yao Zi wrote: >>>> On Sun, Aug 04, 2024 at 04:05:24PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>>> On 04/08/2024 15:20, Yao Zi wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> + compatible = "fixed-clock"; >>>>>>>> + #clock-cells = <0>; >>>>>>>> + clock-frequency = <24000000>; >>>>>>>> + clock-output-names = "xin24m"; >>>>>>>> + }; >>>>>>>> + >>>>>>>> + gic: interrupt-controller@fed01000 { >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Why this all is outside of SoC? >>>>>> >>>>>> Just as Heiko says, device tree for all other Rockchip SoCs don't have >>>>>> a "soc" node. I didn't know why before but just follow the style. >>>>>> >>>>>> If you prefer add a soc node, I am willing to. >>>>> >>>>> Surprising as usually we expect MMIO nodes being part of SoC to be >>>>> under >>>>> soc@, but if that's Rockchip preference then fine. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Okay, then I would leave it as is. >>>> >>>> For the fixed-clock node, I think "xin24m: clock-24m { }" is okay and >>>> follows the new rule? >>> >>> I find "xin24m: clock-xin24m { }" better, because keeping the "xin24m" >>> part in /sys listing(s), for example, can only be helpful. >> >> I would second that :-) . Like on a number of boards we have for example >> 125MHz gmac clock generators ... with 2 gmacs, there are 2 of them. >> >> I'm not sure the preferred name accounts for that? >> >> Similarly we also keep the naming in the regulator node, >> it's regulator-vcc3v3-somename {} instead of just regulator-3v3 {}. >> > > "clock-xin24m" wouldn't be more descriptive than "clock-24m" and there > are usually only a few fixed clocks in dt, thus finding corresponding > definition isn't a problem I think. > > For the gmac case, Krzysztof, do you think something like > "clock-125m-gmac1" is acceptable, just like what has been done for > regulators? > How both above fit the generic node naming rule? You add now specific part - purpose of the clock. The purpose is obvious from clock-output-names or label. Anyway, not important topic to nak these patches. Best regards, Krzysztof