Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: clock: brcm,kona-ccu: convert to YAML

[Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>]

On 23/10/2023 22:17, Stanislav Jakubek wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 09:54:49AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 22/10/2023 13:31, Stanislav Jakubek wrote:
>>> Convert Broadcom Kona family clock controller unit (CCU) bindings
>>> to DT schema.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Stanislav Jakubek <stano.jakubek@gmail.com>
>>
>> Thank you for your patch. There is something to discuss/improve.
>>
>>> +description:
>>> +  Broadcom "Kona" style clock control unit (CCU) is a clock provider that
>>> +  manages a set of clock signals.
>>> +
>>> +properties:
>>> +  compatible:
>>> +    enum:
>>> +      - brcm,bcm11351-aon-ccu
>>> +      - brcm,bcm11351-hub-ccu
>>> +      - brcm,bcm11351-master-ccu
>>> +      - brcm,bcm11351-root-ccu
>>> +      - brcm,bcm11351-slave-ccu
>>> +      - brcm,bcm21664-aon-ccu
>>> +      - brcm,bcm21664-master-ccu
>>> +      - brcm,bcm21664-root-ccu
>>> +      - brcm,bcm21664-slave-ccu
>>> +
>>> +  reg:
>>> +    maxItems: 1
>>> +
>>> +  '#clock-cells':
>>> +    const: 1
>>> +
>>> +  clock-output-names:
>>> +    minItems: 1
>>> +    maxItems: 10
>>> +
>>> +allOf:
>>> +  - if:
>>> +      properties:
>>> +        compatible:
>>> +          contains:
>>> +            enum:
>>> +              - brcm,bcm11351-aon-ccu
>>> +              - brcm,bcm11351-hub-ccu
>>> +              - brcm,bcm11351-master-ccu
>>> +              - brcm,bcm11351-root-ccu
>>> +              - brcm,bcm11351-slave-ccu
>>> +    then:
>>> +      properties:
>>> +        clock-output-names:
>>> +          description: |
>>> +            The following table defines the set of CCUs and clock specifiers
>>> +            for BCM281XX family clocks.
>>> +            These clock specifiers are defined in:
>>> +                "include/dt-bindings/clock/bcm281xx.h"
>>> +
>>> +            CCU     Clock        Type  Index  Specifier
>>> +            ---     -----        ----  -----  ---------
>>> +            root    frac_1m      peri    0    BCM281XX_ROOT_CCU_FRAC_1M
>>> +
>>> +            aon     hub_timer    peri    0    BCM281XX_AON_CCU_HUB_TIMER
>>> +            aon     pmu_bsc      peri    1    BCM281XX_AON_CCU_PMU_BSC
>>> +            aon     pmu_bsc_var  peri    2    BCM281XX_AON_CCU_PMU_BSC_VAR
>>> +
>>> +            hub     tmon_1m      peri    0    BCM281XX_HUB_CCU_TMON_1M
>>> +
>>> +            master  sdio1        peri    0    BCM281XX_MASTER_CCU_SDIO1
>>> +            master  sdio2        peri    1    BCM281XX_MASTER_CCU_SDIO2
>>> +            master  sdio3        peri    2    BCM281XX_MASTER_CCU_SDIO3
>>> +            master  sdio4        peri    3    BCM281XX_MASTER_CCU_SDIO4
>>> +            master  dmac         peri    4    BCM281XX_MASTER_CCU_DMAC
>>> +            master  usb_ic       peri    5    BCM281XX_MASTER_CCU_USB_IC
>>> +            master  hsic2_48m    peri    6    BCM281XX_MASTER_CCU_HSIC_48M
>>> +            master  hsic2_12m    peri    7    BCM281XX_MASTER_CCU_HSIC_12M
>>> +
>>> +            slave   uartb        peri    0    BCM281XX_SLAVE_CCU_UARTB
>>> +            slave   uartb2       peri    1    BCM281XX_SLAVE_CCU_UARTB2
>>> +            slave   uartb3       peri    2    BCM281XX_SLAVE_CCU_UARTB3
>>> +            slave   uartb4       peri    3    BCM281XX_SLAVE_CCU_UARTB4
>>> +            slave   ssp0         peri    4    BCM281XX_SLAVE_CCU_SSP0
>>> +            slave   ssp2         peri    5    BCM281XX_SLAVE_CCU_SSP2
>>> +            slave   bsc1         peri    6    BCM281XX_SLAVE_CCU_BSC1
>>> +            slave   bsc2         peri    7    BCM281XX_SLAVE_CCU_BSC2
>>> +            slave   bsc3         peri    8    BCM281XX_SLAVE_CCU_BSC3
>>> +            slave   pwm          peri    9    BCM281XX_SLAVE_CCU_PWM
>>
>> I don't really understand why this is in the binding schema. I guess you
>> wanted to copy it from the old binding, but, unless there is real reason
>> for it, don't. The clock IDs should be in the header file and that's it.
>> Nothing here.
> 
> Hi Krzysztof, you're correct that I just copied this from the old bindings.
> brcm,iproc-clocks.yaml has a similar table, so I thought this would be fine.
> I'm OK with dropping it, but how should I document the clock-output-names
> values then?

Your schema does not document them, so I don't understand what would you
loose.

> A bunch of if-then blocks (per compatible)? Or should I not even
> bother and just keep minItems/maxItems without documenting the values?

But what do you want to document exactly? Only number of items is
reasonable to constrain and it can be done with if:then blocks.


> 
>>
>>> +  - if:
>>> +      properties:
>>> +        compatible:
>>> +          contains:
>>> +            enum:
>>> +              - brcm,bcm21664-aon-ccu
>>> +              - brcm,bcm21664-master-ccu
>>> +              - brcm,bcm21664-root-ccu
>>> +              - brcm,bcm21664-slave-ccu
>>> +    then:
>>> +      properties:
>>> +        clock-output-names:
>>> +          maxItems: 8
> 
> I've also noticed that dtbs_check gives out warnings(?) like this for
> bcm21664 ccu nodes:
> 
> /arch/arm/boot/dts/broadcom/bcm21664-garnet.dtb:
>     root_ccu@35001000: clock-output-names: ['frac_1m'] is too short
>     from schema $id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/clock/brcm,kona-ccu.yaml#
> 
> and this maxItems:8 seems to me like the culprit (since the bcm11351 if-then
> doesn't have that). Seems to me like it also overrides the minItems to be 8
> as well. I don't understand why it would do that though.
> 
> I suppose just adding minItems: 1 would be the correct fix in this case?

https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.19-rc6/source/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/samsung,exynos7-clock.yaml#L57


Best regards,
Krzysztof