Re: [PATCH 3/4] arm64: dts: rockchip: Add base DT for rk3528 SoC

From: "Heiko Stübner" <heiko@sntech.de>
To: Yao Zi <ziyao@disroot.org>, Dragan Simic <dsimic@manjaro.org>
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@kernel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@kernel.org>,
	Chris Morgan <macromorgan@hotmail.com>,
	Jonas Karlman <jonas@kwiboo.se>, Tim Lunn <tim@feathertop.org>,
	Andy Yan <andyshrk@163.com>,
	Muhammed Efe Cetin <efectn@protonmail.com>,
	Jagan Teki <jagan@edgeble.ai>, Ondrej Jirman <megi@xff.cz>,
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-serial@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] arm64: dts: rockchip: Add base DT for rk3528 SoC
Date: Mon, 05 Aug 2024 13:47:45 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <7941737.iedYuu7f5S@diego> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <82e7e3a78f784b3ad63094c8a0ab1932@manjaro.org>

Am Montag, 5. August 2024, 13:37:11 CEST schrieb Dragan Simic:
> On 2024-08-05 12:59, Yao Zi wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 04, 2024 at 04:05:24PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >> On 04/08/2024 15:20, Yao Zi wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> +		compatible = "fixed-clock";
> >> >>> +		#clock-cells = <0>;
> >> >>> +		clock-frequency = <24000000>;
> >> >>> +		clock-output-names = "xin24m";
> >> >>> +	};
> >> >>> +
> >> >>> +	gic: interrupt-controller@fed01000 {
> >> >>
> >> >> Why this all is outside of SoC?
> >> >
> >> > Just as Heiko says, device tree for all other Rockchip SoCs don't have
> >> > a "soc" node. I didn't know why before but just follow the style.
> >> >
> >> > If you prefer add a soc node, I am willing to.
> >> 
> >> Surprising as usually we expect MMIO nodes being part of SoC to be 
> >> under
> >> soc@, but if that's Rockchip preference then fine.
> >> 
> > 
> > Okay, then I would leave it as is.
> > 
> > For the fixed-clock node, I think "xin24m: clock-24m { }" is okay and
> > follows the new rule?
> 
> I find "xin24m: clock-xin24m { }" better, because keeping the "xin24m"
> part in /sys listing(s), for example, can only be helpful.

I would second that :-) . Like on a number of boards we have for example
125MHz gmac clock generators ... with 2 gmacs, there are 2 of them.

I'm not sure the preferred name accounts for that?

Similarly we also keep the naming in the regulator node,
it's regulator-vcc3v3-somename {} instead of just regulator-3v3 {}.

_______________________________________________
Linux-rockchip mailing list
Linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip