Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: mmc: samsung,exynos-dw-mshc: Make both clocks required

[Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>]

On 06/03/2026 13:55, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Mar 2026 at 12:50, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 06/03/2026 12:27, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>>> The current binding allows one or two clocks to be specified, which is
>>
>> It allows only 2 clocks, unless you meant that referenced dw-mshc schema
>> allows one clock. I don't see it there, so I am a bit confused.
>>
>>> wrong, as both clocks are needed. This is also confirmed by looking at the
>>> exiting upstream DTS files. Let's update the binding to fix this.
>>>
>>> Cc: Ping Gao <ping.gao@samsung.com>
>>> Reported-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>
>>> ---
>>>  .../devicetree/bindings/mmc/samsung,exynos-dw-mshc.yaml          | 1 +
>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/samsung,exynos-dw-mshc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/samsung,exynos-dw-mshc.yaml
>>> index 27c4060f2f91..3e560dde714e 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/samsung,exynos-dw-mshc.yaml
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/samsung,exynos-dw-mshc.yaml
>>> @@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ properties:
>>>      maxItems: 1
>>>
>>>    clocks:
>>> +    minItems: 2
>>
>> That's redundant, 2 clocks are already implied.
> 
> Doesn't maxItems mean the maximum number of clocks? And since clocks
> are required, it means that it's perfectly fine to only have one?
> 
> My points is, we seems to be requiring *exactly* two clocks, no?

minItems is already (implied) at 2, so I don't see what is different
here. You can open any other binding and see exactly same pattern
everywhere, so that's why it would be good to see here explanation why
this binding is different than others. IOW, what set here the number of
items to 1?

Best regards,
Krzysztof