Re: [PATCH v6 2/7] arm64: dts: agilex: Fix fixed-clock schema warnings

[matthew.gerlach@linux.intel.com]

On Wed, 12 Feb 2025, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:

> On 11/02/2025 16:17, Matthew Gerlach wrote:
>> Add required clock-frequency property to fixed-clock nodes
>> to fix schema check warnings.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Matthew Gerlach <matthew.gerlach@linux.intel.com>
>> ---
>> v6:
>>  - New patch to series.
>> ---
>>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/intel/socfpga_agilex.dtsi | 4 ++++
>>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/intel/socfpga_agilex.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/intel/socfpga_agilex.dtsi
>> index 1235ba5a9865..42cb24cfa6da 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/intel/socfpga_agilex.dtsi
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/intel/socfpga_agilex.dtsi
>> @@ -114,21 +114,25 @@ clocks {
>>  		cb_intosc_hs_div2_clk: cb-intosc-hs-div2-clk {
>>  			#clock-cells = <0>;
>>  			compatible = "fixed-clock";
>> +			clock-frequency = <0>;
>
> That's not a correct frequency. You silence some error by introducing
> incorrect properties. That's wrong.

A clock-frequency of 0 seems valid for a clock that is disabled or not 
used on a particular board. I chose this approach because it already has 
widespread usage in the kernel:

 	grep 'clock-frequency = <0>' arch/arm64/boot/dts/*/*.dtsi | wc -l
 	198

>
> Don't fix the warnings just to silence them, while keeping actual errors
> still in the code.

I actually want to fix the existing warnings, but it seems appropriate to 
only address the existing warnings that are related to this patch set of 
adding PCIe Root Port support to the Agilex family of chips. This patch 
set requires touching the file, socfpga_agilex.dtsi; so I fixed the 
warnings I thought were in this file. I believe the other warnings need to 
be fixed by converting text binding descriptions to yaml or by touching 
files unrelated to this patch set.

Setting the value of the status property to "disabled" also silences the 
particular fixed-clock, but I didn't see any other usage by a fixed-clock. 
What do suggest is the best way to handle this warning?

>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>

Thanks for the feedback,
Matthew Gerlach