On 09/01/2026 15:11, Ivan Vecera wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

+  Common properties for devices that require connection to DPLL 
(Digital Phase
+  Locked Loop) pins for frequency synchronization (e.g. SyncE).
+
+properties:
+  dpll-pins:
+    $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/phandle-array
+    description:
+      List of phandles to the DPLL pin nodes connected to this device.
+
+  dpll-pin-names:
+    $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/string-array
+    description:
+      Names for the DPLL pins defined in 'dpll-pins', in the same 
order.
+
+dependencies:
+  dpll-pin-names: [ dpll-pins ]

Binding should go to dtschema. See also commit
3282a891060aace02e3eed4789739768060cea32 in dtschema or other examples
how to add new provider/consumer properties.

Quick questions... if the dpll pin consumer properties schema should go
to dtschema...

1) Should I remove this patch from this series? So this schema won't be
    a part of kernel

Yes.

2) dtschema does not contain dpll-device and dpll-pin schemas now, I

The provider, so the #foo-cells should be in dtschema as well.

    expect they should be added as well... or? I'm asking because there
    is also e.g. hwlock-consumer.yaml in dtschema but no hwlock

hwlock-cells are missing, probably due to licensing.

Best regards,
Krzysztof