Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] dt: snps,designware-i2c: Add clock bindings documentation

[Luis de Oliveira <luis.oliveira@synopsys.com>]

Hi,

Thanks Jarkko.
Yes, "interface clock" for pclk seems good.

Thanks,
Luis

On 27-Feb-19 7:10, Jarkko Nikula wrote:
> On 2/26/19 5:39 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
>>
>>>> + - clock-names : Contains the names of the clocks:
>>>> +    "ic_clk", for the core clock used to generate the external I2C clock.
>>>> +    "pclk", the peripheral clock, required for register accesses.
>>>> +
>>>
>>> Actually it looks there is need to revert back to bus clock (or better) in
>>> comments but keep the "pclk" property.
>>>
>>> The specification I have tells the ic_clk is the peripheral clock which runs
>>> the logic and the pclk (exactly pclk) is for bus interface and where
>>> registers are.
>>
>> Can we make it "bus interface clock" then? I'd think this is a tad
>> better.
>>
> Yes, that makes it clear. Plain "interface clock" might work too. TI OMAPs are
> using that term for register access clock domains.
> 
> Luis: Does that make sense for HW point of view? You mention PCLK is called also
> as application clock but for me personally it is not as clear as interface clock
> when I see it. I'll let Luis have the final word here.
> 
> ic_clk - peripheral clock
> pclk - (bus) interface/application clock
>