On 15/05/2023 18:22, neil.armstrong@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: >>> Meson is the only or almost the only platform making such changes. I >>> don't get why, because the conflict could be easily avoided with using >>> different names for defines in bindings and local clock. Approach of >>> having bindings strictly tied with driver commit is never desired. > > If we did it now, we would have make it differently and expose all the clock > IDs on the bindings like on Qcom, be sure of that. No, you just keep different names. The only problem here is that your clock name is the same thus you cannot split bindings into separate patch. > >> >> Also one more argument maybe not relevant here but for other cases - >> this makes literally impossible to include the clock ID in DTS in the >> same kernel revision, because you must not merge driver branch to DTS >> branch. SoC folks were complaining about this many times. > > Actually we handle this very simply by having such patches merged in a immutable > branch merged in the clock and DT pull-requests, it worked perfectly so far > and neither Stephen or Arnd complained about that. Arnd, Olof, Any changes in the policies? Do you allow now driver branches (with driver code) to be merged into DT branch? Best regards, Krzysztof
