Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] arm64: dts: qcom: Add base QDU1000/QRU1000 IDP DTs

[Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org>]

On 15/12/2022 19:56, Melody Olvera wrote:
> 
> 
> On 12/15/2022 12:44 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 14/12/2022 19:59, Melody Olvera wrote:
>>>>> +			#clock-cells = <0>;
>>>>> +		};
>>>>> +
>>>>> +		sleep_clk: sleep-clk {
>>>>> +			compatible = "fixed-clock";
>>>>> +			clock-frequency = <32000>;
>>>>> +			#clock-cells = <0>;
>>>>> +		};
>>>>> +
>>>>> +		pcie_0_pipe_clk: pcie-0-pipe-clk {
>>>> Afaict these clocks are not referenced anywhere, so please skip them.
>>> Yes, so I included them to be consistent with the bindings. They will be needed later;
>>> should I still remove?
>>>
>> If they are not referenced anywhere, how is it consistent with bindings?
>> Where do the bindings require defining such nodes?
> 
> These bindings here: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20221118181826.28269-2-quic_molvera@quicinc.com/
> I believe you commented that we either have these clocks or we don't, correct? I added them to
> the dt since these clocks exist and will be needed later when USB and PCIE nodes are added.
> As Konrad noted, these technically belong in the PHYs, but I was told to put stub fixed
> clocks instead here: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/2c8c4642-8aee-3da3-7698-5e08b4c5894d@linaro.org/
> 
> How is this to be handled? Should I remove the clocks from the dt and the bindings and add them
> later when we need them? Do I leave stub clocks here with frequency 0 until needed? I am
> very confused right now.

You were told to use stub clocks in the bindings, not in the dtsi file. 
You can use <0> in the dtsi instead.

> 
> Thanks,
> Melody
> 
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Krzysztof
>>
> 

-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry