On 10/02/2025 17:44, Alexander Dahl wrote: > The main rc oscillator will be needed for the OTPC to work properly. > > The new index introduced here was not used on the four affected SoC > clock drivers before, but for sama5d2 only (PMC_I2S1_MUX). > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/20250207-jailbird-circus-bcc04ee90e05@xxxxxxxxxxx/T/#u > Signed-off-by: Alexander Dahl <ada@xxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > > Notes: > v2: > - new patch, not present in v1 > > include/dt-bindings/clock/microchip,sam9x60-pmc.h | 3 +++ > include/dt-bindings/clock/microchip,sam9x7-pmc.h | 3 +++ > include/dt-bindings/clock/microchip,sama7d65-pmc.h | 3 +++ > include/dt-bindings/clock/microchip,sama7g5-pmc.h | 3 +++ > 4 files changed, 12 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/clock/microchip,sam9x60-pmc.h b/include/dt-bindings/clock/microchip,sam9x60-pmc.h > index e01e867e8c4da..dcd3c74f75b54 100644 > --- a/include/dt-bindings/clock/microchip,sam9x60-pmc.h > +++ b/include/dt-bindings/clock/microchip,sam9x60-pmc.h > @@ -16,4 +16,7 @@ > > #define SAM9X60_PMC_PLLACK PMC_PLLACK /* 7 */ > > +/* new from after bindings splitup */ > +#define SAM9X60_PMC_MAIN_RC 6 This is confusing me, because: 1. You still have holes in IDs 2. This should be placed in proper order by ID 3. Why not using 4 - the next available empty ID? Best regards, Krzysztof
