Am Montag, 24. Februar 2025, 09:52:12 MEZ schrieb Kever Yang: > Hi Krzysztof, > > On 2024/12/27 16:25, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 24, 2024 at 05:23:08PM +0800, Kever Yang wrote: > >> Document the device tree bindings of the rockchip rk3562 SoC > >> clock and reset unit. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Kever Yang <kever.yang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > > A nit, subject: drop second/last, redundant "bindings". The > > "dt-bindings" prefix is already stating that these are bindings. > > See also: > > https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.7-rc8/source/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.rst#L18 > > > > > > s/rk3562/Rocchip RK3562/ > > or whatever your proper name is (and use proper capitalized parts of > > products) > Will update. > > > >> +properties: > >> + compatible: > >> + const: rockchip,rk3562-cru > >> + > >> + reg: > >> + maxItems: 1 > >> + > >> + "#clock-cells": > >> + const: 1 > >> + > >> + "#reset-cells": > >> + const: 1 > >> + > >> + clocks: > >> + maxItems: 2 > > > > Why clocks are not required? > The cru is the clock-controller, which is always on module in SoC, > so we don't need to enable "clock" for this clock-controller. hmm, shouldn't clocks be clocks: minItems: 1 maxItems: 2 The CRU _needs_ the xin24m because that is the main oscillator supplying everything, but _can_ work work without xin32k . Sidenote: itseems we're doing this wrong on rk3588 Heiko
