On Thu, 05 Jul 2018, Matti Vaittinen wrote:

On Thu, Jul 05, 2018 at 11:49:19AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:

quoted

On Thu, 05 Jul 2018, Matti Vaittinen wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Jul 05, 2018 at 10:24:44AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:

quoted

On Thu, 05 Jul 2018, Matti Vaittinen wrote:

quoted

Document devicetree bindings for ROHM BD71837 PMIC MFD.

Signed-off-by: Matti Vaittinen <redacted>
Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
---
 .../devicetree/bindings/mfd/rohm,bd71837-pmic.txt  | 67 ++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 67 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/rohm,bd71837-pmic.txt
+		clock-names = "my-clock";
+		clocks = <&pmic>;
+	};

Do you have a real example to give?

For clock consumer? Sorry, no I don't.

Might be better to drop it for the time being then.

I have tested the clk driver using this dummy consumer. So in a sense it
"works" and can be used as an example on how to write a real clock
consumer node. Thus I see some value in this example node - even if it
does not match to any real world HW. If I had to use the clk from this
PMIC and write HW description I would appreciate this dummy exaple. I
can drop it if you insist - but I would at least like to hear what is
the downside on having it here?

My suggestion then would be to make it look as authentic as possible.

It is only an example, so it doesn't *really* matter, but the current
foo,bar one just looks a bit crumby.

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
Linaro Services Technical Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog