On Wed, 21 Jul 2021 16:03:37 +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote: > The original binding was mentioning that valid values for the clocks and > clock-names property were one or two clocks from extclk, txco and lpo, > with extclk being deprecated in favor of txco. > > However, the current binding lists a valid array as extclk, txco and > lpo, with either one or two items. > > While this looks similar, it actually enforces that all the device trees > use either ["extclk"], or ["extclk", "txco"]. That doesn't make much > sense, since the two clocks are said to be equivalent, with one > superseeding the other. > > lpo is also not a valid clock anymore, and would be as the third clock > of the list, while we could have only this clock in the previous binding > (and in DTs). > > Let's rework the clock clause to allow to have either: > > - extclk, and mark it a deprecated > - txco alone > - lpo alone > - txco, lpo > > While ["extclk", "lpo"] wouldn't be valid, it wasn't found in any device > tree so it's not an issue in practice. > > Similarly, ["lpo", "txco"] is still considered invalid, but it's > generally considered as a best practice to fix the order of clocks. > > Cc: "David S. Miller" <[email protected]> > Cc: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]> > Cc: Linus Walleij <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard <[email protected]> > --- > .../bindings/net/broadcom-bluetooth.yaml | 17 +++++++++++++++-- > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >
Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <[email protected]> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "linux-sunxi" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web, visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/linux-sunxi/20210723213843.GA2634543%40robh.at.kernel.org.
