Hello Krzysztof, Am Mon, Feb 10, 2025 at 06:07:10PM +0100 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski: > 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 Yes, I was told to maintain the old values for interface stability in series v1 feedback. > 2. This should be placed in proper order by ID Okay, no problem. > 3. Why not using 4 - the next available empty ID? The MAIN_RC clock is used on four out of thirteen (?) SoC variants which all used the same IDs before. 6 is the first ID which is free on all of sam9x60, sam9x7, sama7g5, and sama7d65. The last two already use 4 for a different clock. The whole splitup is to avoid even more and/or bigger holes, but is it important where the existent holes are filled? Technically if the next available empty ID should be used it would be 4 for sam9x60 and sam9x7, 2 for sama7d65, and 6 for sama7g5. I thought it would be nice to use the same value instead to make somewhat compatible to the old approach. Greets Alex
