19.08.2021 19:31, Thierry Reding пишет:

quoted

quoted

quoted

quoted

Also, I don't think the tegra- prefix is necessary here. The parent node
is already identified as Tegra via the compatible string.

In the case of CAR, I'd imagine something like:

	clocks {
		sclk {
			operating-points-v2 = <&opp_table>;
			power-domains = <&domain>;
		};
	};

Now you've only got the bare minimum in here that you actually add. All
the other data that you used to have is simply derived from the parent.

'clocks' is already a generic keyword in DT. It's probably not okay to
redefine it.

"clocks" is not a generic keyword. It's the name of a property and given
that we're talking about the clock provider here, it doesn't need a
clocks property of its own, so it should be fine to use that for the
node.

I'm curious what Rob thinks about it. Rob, does this sound okay to you?

Another alternative would be to omit that level altogether and just make
sclk and siblings direct children of the CAR node.

That can be done.