On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 08:58:26PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 21/09/2022 19:29, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> >>>>> + clock-names:
> >>>>> + items:
> >>>>> + - const: vclk
> >>>>> + - const: pclk
> >>>>> + - const: aclk
> >>>>
> >>>> Drop the "clk" suffixes. Remaining names could be made a bit more readable.
> >>>
> >>> These names come from the documentation, isn't it better to match the
> >>> datasheet ?
> >>
> >> If datasheet calls it "vclk_really_clk_it_is_clk_clk", it's not the
> >> reason to use it. :)
> >>
> >> The "clk" is redundant even if the hardware engineer thought different.
> >>
> >> The same for IRQs ("tx" not "txirq"), for dmas ("tx" not "txdma").
> >
> > I'd argue that naming clocks "v", "p" and "a" would be less readable and
> > more confusing. Is this a new rule ?
>
> Not really, but also it's only a style issue.
>
> Indeed "v" and "p" are not much better... but still "vclk" does not
> bring any additional information over "v". It's redundant.
>
> You can also drop entire entry - unless it helps in particular
> implementation.
There are multiple clocks, so I think names are better than indices. If
you really insist we could name them "v", "p" and "a", but I think the
clk suffix here improves readability. If those clocks were named
"videoclk", "pixelclk" and "axiclk" I'd be fine dropping the suffix, but
that's not the case here.
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220517175958.GA1321687-robh@xxxxxxxxxx/
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20210815133926.22860-1-biju.das.jz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/YYFCaHI%2FDASUz+Vu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220830182540.GA1797396-robh@xxxxxxxxxx/
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
