Re: [PATCH 2/3] dt-bindings: hwlock: sun6i: Add missing names

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

On 14/02/2023 13:12, Andre Przywara wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Feb 2023 09:45:54 +0000
> Wilken Gottwalt <wilken.gottwalt@posteo.net> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
>> On Tue, 14 Feb 2023 00:19:29 +0100
>> Bastian Germann <bage@debian.org> wrote:
>>
>>> The allwinner,sun6i-a31-hwspinlock.yaml binding needs clock-names
>>> and reset-names set to "ahb" as required by the driver.  
>>
>> Hmm, this one is a bit odd. If you look into my earlier versions of the
>> patchset, you may notice, that I actually included these bindings and they
>> were refused. I think the argumentation was like
>> "there is only one bus = no need for it".
> 
> That's interesting, because your driver implementation relies on there
> being a clock name. And if I chased down devm_clk_get() correctly, there
> must be a named clock in the DT, otherwise it would fail? I haven't tested
> this, though, but I guess this is the  reason for Bastian's patch.
> 
> Regarding "one bus clock only": while this is true, I think there
> is (or was?) also the rationale of using names being more future-proof, so
> adding clocks (for future hardware revisions) can be done more easily,
> without breaking compatibility. It's not a big problem, since you probably
> have a new compatible string in this case anyway, but it also doesn't
> hurt, and allows to use more generic helpers like devm_clk_get().
> 
>> If it gets accepted now, I really like to know why. (It was some trouble
>> back then to get the documentation properly done and accepted.)
> 
> IIUC, it simply doesn't work without a clock-names property.

Oh, there is clear way. One can ignore review and push mismatched
bindings/drivers. Incomplete binding to satisfy DT maintainers and
driver doing something entirely else (using undocumented properties).

Best regards,
Krzysztof