On Fri, May 31, 2024 at 05:19:19PM GMT, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 31/05/2024 17:14, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > > On Fri, May 31, 2024 at 03:52:18PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> Unify Qualcomm clock controllers by referencing qcom,gcc.yaml where > >> applicable. Several existing bindings for these display/GPU/CAM clock > >> controllers already do it. > > > > The series looks good to me with a single point in mind. You are writing > > that dispcc/videocc/etc are a variant of GCC. However GCC is a Global > > Clock Controller. > > Yeah, that's simplification from my side and assumption that at first > they designed GCC and then they copied the design to other blocks. > That may or may not be the case, who knows... I also don't have a strong opinion about tying it all to gcc.yaml if that work... But the claim in the commit messages should the be that we inherit gcc.yaml because it's convenient, not because all clock controllers are derived from gcc. Regards, Bjorn > > What about renaming qcom,gcc.yaml to > > qcom,cc-common.yaml ? Then the rest makes total sense to me. > > Several gpu/disp/cam clock controllers already include qcom,gcc.yaml, so > I would say this should not be a requirement for this patchset. > > We can rename, although it always is a bit of churn - git log needs > special option, backporting is a bit trickier. > > > Best regards, > Krzysztof >
