Re: [PATCH 1/2] ASoC: dt-bindings: realtek,rt5677: Add clock property

[Diogo Ivo <diogo.ivo@bootlin.com>]

On 9/3/26 11:01 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 03, 2026 at 03:26:46PM +0200, Diogo Ivo wrote:
>> On 9/3/26 11:57 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
>>> On Thu, Sep 03, 2026 at 12:11:00AM +0200, Diogo Ivo wrote:
> 
>>>> +  clock-names:
>>>> +    items:
>>>> +      - const: mclk
> 
>>> The driver code has a reference to MCLK1 which implies multiple MCLKs,
>>> unfortunately no pinout seems to be available and other references in
>>> the driver are just to MCLK so it could be cut'n'paste.
> 
>> Thanks for raising this point, I had missed it completely. In fact,
>> looking at rt5677.h there are two places where MCLK2 is mentioned:
> 
>> #define RT5677_MCLK_SRC_SFT                     10
>> #define RT5677_MCLK1_SRC                        (0x0 << 10)
>> #define RT5677_MCLK2_SRC                        (0x1 << 10)
> 
>> and
> 
>> #define RT5677_PLL2_PR_SRC_SFT                  15
>> #define RT5677_PLL2_PR_SRC_MCLK1                (0x0 << 15)
>> #define RT5677_PLL2_PR_SRC_MCLK2                (0x1 << 15)
> 
>> so to me it _looks_ like there are indeed two MCLK inputs, both of which
>> can drive the MCLK clock and can also be the input of PLL2. However, as
>> you mentioned I also wasn't able to find the pinout/datasheet and I have
>> no way of testing this. I think the safest bet here is that I send a v2
>> where I rename "mclk" to "mclk1" that we know for a fact exists, and
>> then later on if someone with access to the actual datasheet comes along
>> and confirms the existence of "mclk2" we can add it to the binding.
> 
>> Let me know what you think!
> 
> That would be safe, but let's add the Realtek maintainer (who I'm
> surprised you didn't CC...).  I've also added Ben Zhang who did a bunch
> of work on the device for Chrome and might be able to check too.

Thanks for including them. I simply continued the conversation with the
initial recipients coming from b4 prep --auto-to-cc.

Diogo