On 12/15/2022 10:47 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On 15/12/2022 19:56, Melody Olvera wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 12/15/2022 12:44 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 14/12/2022 19:59, Melody Olvera wrote:
>>>>>> + #clock-cells = <0>;
>>>>>> + };
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + sleep_clk: sleep-clk {
>>>>>> + compatible = "fixed-clock";
>>>>>> + clock-frequency = <32000>;
>>>>>> + #clock-cells = <0>;
>>>>>> + };
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + pcie_0_pipe_clk: pcie-0-pipe-clk {
>>>>> Afaict these clocks are not referenced anywhere, so please skip them.
>>>> Yes, so I included them to be consistent with the bindings. They will be needed later;
>>>> should I still remove?
>>>>
>>> If they are not referenced anywhere, how is it consistent with bindings?
>>> Where do the bindings require defining such nodes?
>>
>> These bindings here: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20221118181826.28269-2-quic_molvera@xxxxxxxxxxx/
>> I believe you commented that we either have these clocks or we don't, correct? I added them to
>> the dt since these clocks exist and will be needed later when USB and PCIE nodes are added.
>> As Konrad noted, these technically belong in the PHYs, but I was told to put stub fixed
>> clocks instead here: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/2c8c4642-8aee-3da3-7698-5e08b4c5894d@xxxxxxxxxx/
>>
>> How is this to be handled? Should I remove the clocks from the dt and the bindings and add them
>> later when we need them? Do I leave stub clocks here with frequency 0 until needed? I am
>> very confused right now.
>
> You were told to use stub clocks in the bindings, not in the dtsi file. You can use <0> in the dtsi instead.
Oh ok that makes more sense. I appreciate the clarification.
Thanks,
Melody
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Melody
>>
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Krzysztof
>>>
>>
>
