On 6/24/2024 10:19 AM, Jacobe Zang wrote:
> Add clocks and clock-names for brcm4329-fmac.

Thanks. Prefer another clock name though ...

> Signed-off-by: Jacobe Zang <jacobe.zang@wesion.com>
> ---
>   .../bindings/net/wireless/brcm,bcm4329-fmac.yaml         | 9 +++++++++
>   1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/brcm,bcm4329-fmac.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/brcm,bcm4329-fmac.yaml
> index e564f20d8f415..b9e39a62c3b32 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/brcm,bcm4329-fmac.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/brcm,bcm4329-fmac.yaml
> @@ -121,6 +121,15 @@ properties:
>         NVRAM. This would normally be filled in by the bootloader from platform
>         configuration data.
>   
> +  clocks:
> +    description: phandle to the clock connected on rtc clock line.
> +    maxItems: 1
> +
> +  clock-names:
> +    description: Names of the supplied clocks.
> +    items:
> +      - const: 32k

While it is a 32kHz clock I would prefer to use the functional name. The 
input pin on the chip is called "LPO_IN" in our schematics as well as in 
the AMPAK datasheet. In the Edge 2 schematics it is simply "LPO". 
Another name used is "EXT_LPO" as opposed to the internal LPO, which can 
be selected through boardflags3 in nvram file. Having the clock external 
is better although it seems the edge 2 does not provide the recommended 
ppm. In short I would suggest to pick one of the following names: 
lpo-in, lpo, or ext-lpo.

This affect the driver patch which is why I tend to go for consensus on 
the bindings first before posting a driver patch. With only a single 
rename it is not that much churn though.

Regards,
Arend

>   required:
>     - compatible
>     - reg