Re: [PATCH 2/8] dt-bindings: clock: stm32mp1: describes clocks if "st,stm32mp1-rcc-secure"

[Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>]

On 4/22/22 17:09, Alexandre Torgue wrote:
> In case of "st,stm32mp1-rcc-secure" (stm32mp1 clock driver with RCC
> security support hardened), "clocks" and "clock-names" describe oscillators
> and are required.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@foss.st.com>
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/st,stm32mp1-rcc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/st,stm32mp1-rcc.yaml
> index 7a251264582d..bb0e0b92e907 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/st,stm32mp1-rcc.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/st,stm32mp1-rcc.yaml
> @@ -58,14 +58,8 @@ properties:
>             - st,stm32mp1-rcc-secure
>             - st,stm32mp1-rcc
>         - const: syscon
> -
> -  clocks:
> -    description:
> -      Specifies the external RX clock for ethernet MAC.
> -    maxItems: 1
> -
> -  clock-names:
> -    const: ETH_RX_CLK/ETH_REF_CLK
> +  clocks: true
> +  clock-names: true

It looks like this should rather be a property than a compatible string 
-- the compatible string is used by the OS to determine which hardware 
is represented by a node, but here it is the same hardware in either 
case, "st,stm32mp1-rcc" and "st,stm32mp1-rcc-secure", it is still the 
same STM32MP1 RCC block, just configured differently by some bootloader 
stage.

So why not just add one-liner property of the RCC block like ?
st,rcc-in-secure-configuration