On 26.08.2023 14:08, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote: > On 26/08/2023 11:13, Konrad Dybcio wrote: >> On 23.08.2023 12:44, 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. >> This only reinforces my point about adding like csiphy_clks or so >> >> Konrad > > I really don't understand your point. Could you please restate it ? If we categorized the clocks at probe time (these ones go to csiphy, these ones go to vfe or whatever), name matching like this could be avoided Konrad
