RE: [PATCH 3/4] dt-bindings: clock: Add AST2700 clock bindings

[Ryan Chen <ryan_chen@aspeedtech.com>]

> Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] dt-bindings: clock: Add AST2700 clock bindings
> 
> On 19/08/2024 08:42, Ryan Chen wrote:
> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] dt-bindings: clock: Add AST2700 clock
> >> bindings
> >>
> >> On 19/08/2024 07:55, Ryan Chen wrote:
> >>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] dt-bindings: clock: Add AST2700 clock
> >>>> bindings
> >>>>
> >>>> On 13/08/2024 03:53, Ryan Chen wrote:
> >>>>>> Drop the define for number of clocks from the header, because it
> >>>>>> is not a
> >>>>
> >>>> *NUMBER OF CLOCKS*
> >>>>
> >>>>>> binding. You can put it in the driver or not, I don't care and do
> >>>>>> not provide guidance on this because I don't know if it makes sense at
> all.
> >>>>>> What I know is that number of clocks is not related to binding.
> >>>>>> It is not needed
> >>>>
> >>>> *NUMBER OF CLOCKS*
> >>>>
> >>>>>> in the binding, either.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Sorry, I am confused.
> >>>>> if you think that number of clocks is not related to binding.
> >>>>
> >>>> *NUMBER OF CLOCKS*
> >>>>
> >>>>> How dtsi claim for clk?
> >>>>> For example in dtsi.
> >>>>> include <dt-bindings/clock/aspeed,ast2700-clk.h>
> >>>>> usb3bhp: usb3bhp {
> >>>>> ....
> >>>>> clocks = <&syscon0 SCU0_CLK_GATE_PORTAUSB>;
> >>>>
> >>>> And where is *NUMBER OF CLOCKS* here? I don't see any problem. No
> >>>> useless SCU0_CLK_GATE_NUM define here.
> >>>>
> >>> Understood now, I will remove those *NUMBER OF CLOCKS*.
> >>> And will replace to
> >>> #define SCU0_CLK_END  34
> >>
> >> NAK, it's like you keep ignoring my comments entirely. Even if you
> >> call it "SCU0_CLK_NOT_END" it does not change. Do you understand that
> >> it is not about name? Read my first comment.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Refer:
> >>> https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/include/dt-bindings/cl
> >>> oc
> >>> k/imx8-clock.h#L87
> >>
> >> So you found a bug and this allows you to create the same bug?
> >>
> > Sorry, I don't see this is a bug.
> 
> No, it's not a bug, but I do not agree for using arguments like "someone did it,
> so I can do the same". Why did you pick up exactly this example instead of
> others who removed the clock number?
> 
> > But I try to understand your point, you prefer following for clock nums, am I
> correct?
> > https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/drivers/clk/meson/g12a.c
> > #L5558-L5559
> 
> I said that this is not a binding. Don't add to the binding things which are not a
> binding.
> 
> I don't care how do you implement in drivers - there are several ways how to
> achieve it.
Understood, I will remove *NUMBER OF CLOCKS*
> 
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof