Re: [PATCH 3/4] arm64: dts: rockchip: Add base DT for rk3528 SoC

Hello Yao,

On 2024-08-05 18:22, Yao Zi wrote:

On Mon, Aug 05, 2024 at 01:47:45PM +0200, Heiko Stübner wrote:

quoted

Am Montag, 5. August 2024, 13:37:11 CEST schrieb Dragan Simic:

quoted

On 2024-08-05 12:59, Yao Zi wrote:

quoted

On Sun, Aug 04, 2024 at 04:05:24PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:

quoted

On 04/08/2024 15:20, Yao Zi wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

+		compatible = "fixed-clock";
+		#clock-cells = <0>;
+		clock-frequency = <24000000>;
+		clock-output-names = "xin24m";
+	};
+
+	gic: interrupt-controller@fed01000 {

Why this all is outside of SoC?

Just as Heiko says, device tree for all other Rockchip SoCs don't have
a "soc" node. I didn't know why before but just follow the style.

If you prefer add a soc node, I am willing to.

Surprising as usually we expect MMIO nodes being part of SoC to be
under
soc@, but if that's Rockchip preference then fine.

Okay, then I would leave it as is.

For the fixed-clock node, I think "xin24m: clock-24m { }" is okay and
follows the new rule?

I find "xin24m: clock-xin24m { }" better, because keeping the "xin24m"
part in /sys listing(s), for example, can only be helpful.

I would second that :-) . Like on a number of boards we have for 
example
125MHz gmac clock generators ... with 2 gmacs, there are 2 of them.

I'm not sure the preferred name accounts for that?

Similarly we also keep the naming in the regulator node,
it's regulator-vcc3v3-somename {} instead of just regulator-3v3 {}.

"clock-xin24m" wouldn't be more descriptive than "clock-24m" and there
are usually only a few fixed clocks in dt, thus finding corresponding
definition isn't a problem I think.

Well, using "clock-xin24m" comes with another benefit, which is using
the same "xin24m" as in the actual clock name.  That way, the same clock
name gets used in various /sys listings and in the debug clock summary
in /sys.  Having that kind of consistency can only be beneficial.

For the gmac case, Krzysztof, do you think something like
"clock-125m-gmac1" is acceptable, just like what has been done for
regulators?