Re: [PATCH RFC v2 1/5] dt-bindings: clock: histb-clock: Add missing common clock and Hi3798MV200 specific clock definition
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <hidden>
Date: 2024-02-20 16:13:48
Also in:
linux-clk, lkml
On 20/02/2024 15:06, Yang Xiwen wrote:
On 2/20/2024 6:10 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:quoted
On 17/02/2024 13:52, Yang Xiwen via B4 Relay wrote:quoted
From: Yang Xiwen <redacted> According to the datasheet, some clocks are missing, add their definitions first. Some aliases for hi3798mv200 are also introduced. Signed-off-by: Yang Xiwen <redacted> --- include/dt-bindings/clock/histb-clock.h | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+)diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/clock/histb-clock.h b/include/dt-bindings/clock/histb-clock.h index e64e5770ada6..68a53053586a 100644 --- a/include/dt-bindings/clock/histb-clock.h +++ b/include/dt-bindings/clock/histb-clock.h@@ -58,6 +58,27 @@ #define HISTB_USB3_UTMI_CLK1 48 #define HISTB_USB3_PIPE_CLK1 49 #define HISTB_USB3_SUSPEND_CLK1 50 +#define HISTB_SDIO1_BIU_CLK 51 +#define HISTB_SDIO1_CIU_CLK 52 +#define HISTB_SDIO1_DRV_CLK 53 +#define HISTB_SDIO1_SAMPLE_CLK 54 +#define HISTB_ETH0_PHY_CLK 55 +#define HISTB_ETH1_PHY_CLK 56 +#define HISTB_WDG0_CLK 57 +#define HISTB_USB2_UTMI0_CLK HISTB_USB2_UTMI_CLKWhy? It's anyway placed oddly, the entries are ordered by number/value.So this is somewhat broken at the beginning. It named after histb-clock.h but actually they are all clocks for Hi3798CV200 SoC. For Hi3798MV200(also a HiSTB SoC), there is one additional UTMI clock. What solution do you prefer? rename UTMI_CLK to UTMI0_CLK, add UTMI1_CLK after it and increment all the indexes after it? Then the diff would be very ugly.
I still don't understand what is the problem you are trying to solve here. Your commit msg says add missing ID, but that ID - HISTB_USB2_UTMI_CLK - is already there. I also do not get why there is a need to rename anything. Best regards, Krzysztof