On Mon Mar 24, 2025 at 5:30 PM CET, Rob Herring wrote:
On Fri, Mar 21, 2025 at 08:09:33PM +0100, Théo Lebrun wrote:
quoted
Allow providing tsu_clk without a tx_clk as both are optional.
Why? Is there some new h/w? Where's the compatible for it. Or this fixes
some existing user? Which one?
I encountered this while supporting a new compatible yes:
mobileye,eyeq5-gem.
But this is more about relaxing unneeded requirements: the previous
bindings said "if you provide a tsu_clk, please provide a tx_clk". That
constraint can be removed as there is no relation inbetween tx_clk and
tsu_clk.
So I'd describe that as a semantic fix of the dt-bindings, that happens
to be useful for our newly introduced compatible.
Or am I mistaken? In any case, I should expand the commit message.
Thanks,
--
Théo Lebrun, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com