Re: [PATCH v4 00/15] clk: qcom: Fix parenting for dispcc/gpucc/videocc

Bjorn Andersson
2020-02-03T20:04:48Z

On Mon 03 Feb 11:41 PST 2020, Doug Anderson wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 11:30 AM Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > Quoting Douglas Anderson (2020-02-03 10:31:33)
> > >
> > > .../devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,gpucc.yaml | 72 --------------
> > > ...om,dispcc.yaml => qcom,msm8998-gpucc.yaml} | 33 +++----
> > > .../bindings/clock/qcom,sc7180-dispcc.yaml | 84 ++++++++++++++++
> > > .../bindings/clock/qcom,sc7180-gpucc.yaml | 72 ++++++++++++++
> > > .../bindings/clock/qcom,sc7180-videocc.yaml | 63 ++++++++++++
> > > .../bindings/clock/qcom,sdm845-dispcc.yaml | 99 +++++++++++++++++++
> > > .../bindings/clock/qcom,sdm845-gpucc.yaml | 72 ++++++++++++++
> > > ...,videocc.yaml => qcom,sdm845-videocc.yaml} | 27 ++---
> > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180.dtsi | 47 +++++++++
> > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi | 28 +++++-
> >
> > I don't want to take patches touching dts/qcom/. These aren't necessary
> > to merge right now, correct? Or at least, they can go via arm-soc tree?
>
> Right. They can go later.
>
> Specifically for sdm845 until the sdm845 patches lands the old dts
> trees will yell about the missing clocks, but it's not like they will
> compile fail. Also the bindings themselves will validate fine.
> There's no other way forward, though, and the old bindings caused
> similar yells.
>

Can you please help me parse this, will old DT cause complaints or will
it fail to boot?

> For sc7180 there's no usage of any of these clocks and this adds the
> first usage, so definitely no problem there.
>
> Once you've landed then Bjorn or Andy can pick up the dts.
>

Do I need to apply these after Stephen picks the driver patches? Or are
they simply nop until the driver patches lands?

Regards,
Bjorn