On 17.08.2023 16:38, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote: > Several of our upstream and soon-to-be upstream SoC CAMSS dtsi declare > csiphyX as opposed to the older clock name csiX_phy. > > For newer SoCs csiphyX turns out to be a clock you really need to set. > > On sc8280xp for example we will encounter difficult to track down and > root-cause RX CRC errors without setting the csiX_phy clock. On sdm845 and > sm8250 we declare the csiXphy clock but seem to get away with not setting > it. > > The right approach here is to set the clock when it is declared. If a SoC > doesn't require or a SoC driver implementer doesn't think we need, then the > clock ought to simply be omitted from the clock list. > > Include csiphyX in the set of permissible strings which will subsequently > lead to the csiphyX clock being set during csiphy_set_clock_rates() phase. > > Signed-off-by: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- So.. is this just a namechange? Is it really necessary? Konrad
