On 22/09/2026 15:13, Alex Elder wrote: > On 9/20/26 1:21 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>> diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/clock/toshiba,tc9564.h >>> b/include/dt-bindings/clock/toshiba,tc9564.h >>> new file mode 100644 >>> index 0000000000000..75732fddd3025 >>> --- /dev/null >>> +++ b/include/dt-bindings/clock/toshiba,tc9564.h >>> @@ -0,0 +1,54 @@ >>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) */ >>> + >>> +/* >>> + * Copyright (C) 2026 by RISCstar Solutions Corporation. All rights >>> reserved. >>> + */ >>> + >>> +#ifndef __ClOCK_TOSHIBA_TC9564_H__ >>> +#define __ClOCK_TOSHIBA_TC9564_H__ >>> + >>> +/* Clock IDs */ >>> + >>> +#define CLOCK_MCU 0 >>> +#define CLOCK_INTC 1 >>> +/* #define CLOCK_PCIE 2 */ >>> +/* #define CLOCK_I2C 3 */ >> Drop both, and SRAM is number 2. Or enable and implement them. > > I forgot to respond to this. I think you are confused. > > SRAM is BAR number 2. This is defining clock IDs. > > And the reason these are commented out is that, while they > do exist, we explicitly do not want anyone to disable either > of these clocks because PCIe uses them. This clock (and > reset) control is accessed via PCIe. > > I do accept that someone might want me to simply omit > these commented-out definitions, and I'd be fine with > that. > > But your suggestion wasn't sensible so I wanted to clear > that up before deleting these. >
Indices should be continuous, there is no point in having holes in numbering. Best regards, Krzysztof
