On 2023-06-29 13:55:28, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On 27/06/2023 23:14, Marijn Suijten wrote:
> > We have a working RPM XO clock; no other driver except rpmcc should be
> > parenting directly to the fixed-factor xo_board clock nor should it be
> > reachable by that global name. Remove the name to that effect, so that
> > every clock relation is explicitly defined in DTS.
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6125.dtsi | 7 ++++---
> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6125.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6125.dtsi
> > index 722dde560bec..edb03508dba3 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6125.dtsi
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm6125.dtsi
> > @@ -22,7 +22,6 @@ xo_board: xo-board {
> > compatible = "fixed-clock";
> > #clock-cells = <0>;
> > clock-frequency = <19200000>;
> > - clock-output-names = "xo_board";
>
> Why? I'd say, leave it.
The exact reason is explained in the commit message.
>
> With that fixed:
Hence I don't think it makes sense to "fix" this.
- Marijn
> Reviewed-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@xxxxxxxxxx>
