Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] dt-bindings: i2c: qcom-cci: Document sm6150 compatible
From: Wenmeng Liu <hidden>
Date: 2026-01-07 10:08:04
Also in:
linux-arm-msm, linux-i2c, linux-media, lkml
From: Wenmeng Liu <hidden>
Date: 2026-01-07 10:08:04
Also in:
linux-arm-msm, linux-i2c, linux-media, lkml
On 1/7/2026 4:34 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On 07/01/2026 09:17, Wenmeng Liu wrote:quoted
On 1/7/2026 4:00 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:quoted
On Tue, Jan 06, 2026 at 05:39:53PM +0800, Wenmeng Liu wrote:quoted
+ - if: + properties: + compatible: + contains: + enum: + - qcom,sm6150-cci + then: + properties: + clocks: + minItems: 3 + maxItems: 3 + clock-names: + items: + - const: soc_ahbSame question as before. I did not see any resolution of this in changelog or commit msg.Will update commit msg in next version: For this platform, it uses soc_ahb instead of camnoc_axi.That was not my question from v1. AHB and AXI are both bus clocks, meaning for this device the same. You again name the clocks how you called them in clock controller which is wrong. You name here CLOCK INPUTS. What is the role of this clock FOR THIS DEVICE? I already asked to pay attention to this difference. Best regards, Krzysztof
Ok, i got it, just feel a bit confused. + clocks = <&camcc CAM_CC_SOC_AHB_CLK>, + <&camcc CAM_CC_CPAS_AHB_CLK>, + <&camcc CAM_CC_CCI_CLK>; + clock-names = "camnoc_axi", + "cpas_ahb", + "cci"; clocks = <&camcc CAM_CC_SOC_AHB_CLK>, clock-names = "camnoc_axi"; If this is acceptable, I will update it this way in the next version. Thanks, Wenmeng