Re: [PATCH 1/3] dt-bindings: clock: qcom: document the Milos GX clock controller

["Luca Weiss" <luca.weiss@fairphone.com>]

On Thu Apr 2, 2026 at 10:23 AM CEST, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 07/03/2026 16:30, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> +
>>> +properties:
>>> +  compatible:
>>> +    enum:
>>> +      - qcom,milos-gxclkctl
>>> +
>>> +  power-domains:
>>> +    description:
>>> +      Power domains required for the clock controller to operate
>>> +    items:
>>> +      - description: GFX power domain
>>> +      - description: GPUCC(CX) power domain
>>> +
>>> +  '#power-domain-cells':
>>> +    const: 1
>>> +
>>> +  reg:
>>> +    maxItems: 1
>> 
>> reg should be the second property, like you have it in "required" part.
>> I guess you copied it from kaanapali-gxclkctl.yaml, so lesson - qcom
>> bindings have acceptable quality, but not good enough to take as correct
>> starting point.
>> 
>
> OTOH, why this entire binding cannot be squashed in Kaanapali one?
> What's the difference?

There's no GMXC power domain on Milos. Apart from that they're
compatible from a bindings perspective.

However it can re-use include/dt-bindings/clock/qcom,kaanapali-gxclkctl.h
because the GX_CLKCTL_GX_GDSC definition would be identical.

And also the driver (which can be used as-is) would be identical. In
that driver qcom,kaanapali-gxclkctl.h is used so it makes sense to keep
with the kaanapali header, or not? Making a qcom,milos-gxclkctl.h with
the same definition is not wanted?

Regards
Luca