Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] serial: sc16is7xx: Add bindings documentation for the SC16IS7XX UARTs

[Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>]

On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 12:49:59PM +0000, Jon Ringle wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 5:08 AM, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 06:19:24PM +0000, jon@ringle.org wrote:
> >> +- interrupt-parent: The phandle for the interrupt controller that
> >> +  services interrupts for this IC.
> >> +- interrupts: Specifies the interrupt source of the parent interrupt
> >> +  controller. The format of the interrupt specifier depends on the
> >> +  parent interrupt controller.
> >
> > Just describe what the device-specific interrupt logically is, not what
> > the interrupts property means in general.
> >
> 
> Something like this ok?:
> 
> -interrupts: Should contain the UART interrupt

Sure.

> 
> >> +- clocks: phandle to the IC source clock.
> >
> > Nit: clocks aren't just referred to with phandles; there's a clock
> > specifier too.
> >
> > Either correct the type here or don't mention the type at all, given
> > this is a common property.
> >
> 
> I'm not sure what to do here. Many of the other
> devicetree/bindings/serial/*.txt use phandle verbage and also the
> devicetree/bindings/clock-bindings.txt documentation for clocks refers
> the type as phandle too:
> 
> ==Clock consumers==
> 
> Required properties:
> clocks:         List of phandle and clock specifier pairs, one pair
>                 for each clock input to the device.  Note: if the
>                 clock provider specifies '0' for #clock-cells, then
>                 only the phandle portion of the pair will appear.
> 

Those bindings which refer to clocks as just being phandles are simply
wrong.

While clocks _may_ be simply phandles, that isn't the general case (and
when this is the case they can be thought of as having a zero cell
clock-specifier). The quoted portion of the core clock bindings
describes clocks as consisting of "phandle and and clock specifier
pairs", not just phandles.

> Is something like this ok?:
> 
> clocks: reference to the source clock

Sure. That'll be fine.

Thanks,
Mark.