Re: [PATCHv4 wireless-next 7/7] dt-bindings: net: wireless: rt2800: add

[Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>]

On 14/07/2025 21:44, Rosen Penev wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 14, 2025 at 12:27 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Jul 12, 2025 at 02:04:48PM -0700, Rosen Penev wrote:
>>> Add device-tree bindings for the RT2800 SOC wifi device found in older
>>> Ralink/Mediatek devices.
>>
>> Your subject was cut. Probably you wanted something like add "Realtek foo adapter" etc.
> Not sure I follow.

Your subject is oddly incomplete.

>>
>>
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Rosen Penev <rosenp@gmail.com>
>>> ---
>>>  .../bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2880.yaml  | 47 +++++++++++++++++++
>>>  1 file changed, 47 insertions(+)
>>>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2880.yaml
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2880.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2880.yaml
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 000000000000..a92aedf6ba01
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ralink,rt2880.yaml
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,47 @@
>>> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
>>> +%YAML 1.2
>>> +---
>>> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/net/wireless/ralink,rt2880.yaml#
>>> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
>>> +
>>> +title: Ralink RT2880 wireless device
>>> +
>>> +maintainers:
>>> +  - Stanislaw Gruszka <stf_xl@wp.pl>
>>> +
>>> +description: |
>>> +  This node provides properties for configuring RT2880 SOC wifi devices.
>>> +  The node is expected to be specified as a root node of the device.
>>> +
>>> +allOf:
>>> +  - $ref: ieee80211.yaml#
>>> +
>>> +properties:
>>> +  compatible:
>>> +    enum:
>>> +      - ralink,rt2880-wifi
>>> +
>>> +  reg:
>>> +    maxItems: 1
>>> +
>>> +  clocks:
>>> +    maxItems: 1
>>> +
>>> +  interrupts:
>>> +    maxItems: 1
>>> +
>>> +required:
>>> +  - compatible
>>> +  - reg
>>
>> Why clocks are optional? SoC devices rarely work without a clock.
> Before this patchset the code was doing
> 
>  25         rt2x00dev->clk = clk_get(&pdev->dev, NULL);
>  24         if (IS_ERR(rt2x00dev->clk))
>  23                 rt2x00dev->clk = NULL;


That's driver. I am asking about hardware. Hardware rarely works without
clock. Just because some driver works is not a really a good proof,
because clock could be enabled by bootloader which would still prove my
point: hardware cannot work without clock.

Best regards,
Krzysztof