On 23/12/2022 10:21, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:

Il 23/12/22 09:52, Krzysztof Kozlowski ha scritto:

quoted

On 22/12/2022 12:48, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:

quoted

Some old MediaTek clock drivers are starting the clock count (so, the
clock ID) from one instead of zero and this is logically incorrect,
as we should start from 0.
During a cleanup an issue emerged due to that and the cleanest and
shortest way to keep devicetree backwards compatibility while still
performing the well deserved cleanup is to add a dummy clock where
needed, with ID 0.

Unfortunately I do not understand at all why adding dummy (fake) ID
cleans anything here. Unifying IDs to start from 0 is not an argument on
DT bindings header IDs.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

All clocks are in one or multiple arrays, and if we don't register ID 0,
devicetrees will reference the wrong clock, as the IDs will shift back by
one during registration.

So what stops you to register some 0-dummy clock? Why do you need a
binding for it?

This was done for a commonization of probe() and remove() callbacks for
MediaTek clock drivers... since we have 3 affected SoCs (MT8173, MT2701
and MT6779) out of *19* (soon 20), to me, it didn't make sense to write
commonized code to address this just because of 3 out of 20 SoCs (note
that each SoC has around 4 clock drivers).

Any suggestion to keep this one short, while not touching dt-bindings?

Just add a clock or better empty entry in your table, without touching
bindings.


Best regards,
Krzysztof


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel