On 12/15/23 19:25, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 15/12/2023 20:24, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 15/12/2023 11:23, Tudor Ambarus wrote: >>> Hi, Krzysztof, >>> >>> On 12/15/23 08:13, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>> On 14/12/2023 11:52, Tudor Ambarus wrote: >>>>> The gs101 clock names are derived from the clock register names under >>>>> some certain rules. In particular, for the gate clocks the following is >>>>> documented and expected in the gs101 clock driver: >>>>> >>>>> Replace CLK_CON_GAT_CLKCMU with CLK_GOUT_CMU and gout_cmu >>>>> Replace CLK_CON_GAT_GATE_CLKCMU with CLK_GOUT_CMU and gout_cmu >>>>> >>>>> For gates remove _UID _BLK _IPCLKPORT and _RSTNSYNC >>>> >>>> I don't understand what it has to do with the bindings. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> The CMU TOP gate clock names missed to include the required "CMU" >>>>> differentiator which will cause name collisions with the gate clock names >>>>> of other clock units. Fix the TOP gate clock names and include "CMU" in >>>>> their name. >>>> >>>> Neither here. Clock names are not related to defines. >>>> >>> >>> When saying "clock names" I meant the clock symbolic names that are >>> defined in the bindings, the _id passed in GATE(_id, ) if you want. >> >> Please re-phrase the commit message to say that you need to rename the >> defines in the bindings headers. If you change anything else, like clock >> names, then it should be separate patch. > > I forgot: > You can also respin this patch separately, as soon as possible, because > it has to go this cycle. > Sent here: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/20231218064333.479885-1-tudor.ambarus@xxxxxxxxxx/ Thanks, ta
