Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] dt-bindings: phy: qcom,msm8998-qmp-usb3-phy: Add support for Shikra

[Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>]

On 05/05/2026 15:57, Krishna Kurapati wrote:
> 
> 
> On 5/5/2026 6:59 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 05/05/2026 15:27, Krishna Kurapati wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 5/5/2026 4:22 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>> On 05/05/2026 12:49, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, May 04, 2026 at 10:36:57PM +0530, Krishna Kurapati wrote:
>>>>>> Declare the USB-C QMP PHY present on the Qualcomm Shikra platform.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Krishna Kurapati <krishna.kurapati@oss.qualcomm.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>    .../devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,msm8998-qmp-usb3-phy.yaml      | 2 ++
>>>>>>    1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>>>>
>>>>> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@oss.qualcomm.com>
>>>>
>>>> ... and then I looked at the driver. So un-reviewed. Devices are clearly
>>>> compatible. If not, explain what is not compatible.
>>>>
>>> Talos uses GCC_USB3_PRIM_PHY_AUX_CLK.
>>>
>>> In Shikra, we are using GCC_USB3_PRIM_PHY_COM_AUX_CLK. We don't have
>>> GCC_USB3_PRIM_PHY_AUX_CLK.
>>>
>>> Hence, I didn't use a fallback compatible.
>>
>> This still explains nothing. How different clock makes interface for SW
>> incompatible exactly?
>>
> So I went by the naming. AUX vs COM_AUX.

The naming does not matter. If the clock is called
"no_one_expects_spanish_inquisition", does that make software
incompatible? Why would the name itself matter?

> 
> Can I use a fallback compatible and in DT vote for "COM_AUX" clock with 
> clock-names mentioning "aux" ?

I don't know, I asked what is different in software interface.

Best regards,
Krzysztof