[PATCH v2 04/16] dt-bindings: clock: at91: Allow referencing main rc oscillator in DT

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 10/02/2025 17:44, Alexander Dahl wrote:
> The main rc oscillator will be needed for the OTPC to work properly.
> 
> The new index introduced here was not used on the four affected SoC
> clock drivers before, but for sama5d2 only (PMC_I2S1_MUX).
> 
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/20250207-jailbird-circus-bcc04ee90e05@thorsis.com/T/#u
> Signed-off-by: Alexander Dahl <ada at thorsis.com>
> ---
> 
> Notes:
>     v2:
>     - new patch, not present in v1
> 
>  include/dt-bindings/clock/microchip,sam9x60-pmc.h  | 3 +++
>  include/dt-bindings/clock/microchip,sam9x7-pmc.h   | 3 +++
>  include/dt-bindings/clock/microchip,sama7d65-pmc.h | 3 +++
>  include/dt-bindings/clock/microchip,sama7g5-pmc.h  | 3 +++
>  4 files changed, 12 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/clock/microchip,sam9x60-pmc.h b/include/dt-bindings/clock/microchip,sam9x60-pmc.h
> index e01e867e8c4da..dcd3c74f75b54 100644
> --- a/include/dt-bindings/clock/microchip,sam9x60-pmc.h
> +++ b/include/dt-bindings/clock/microchip,sam9x60-pmc.h
> @@ -16,4 +16,7 @@
>  
>  #define SAM9X60_PMC_PLLACK	PMC_PLLACK	/* 7 */
>  
> +/* new from after bindings splitup */
> +#define SAM9X60_PMC_MAIN_RC	6

This is confusing me, because:
1. You still have holes in IDs
2. This should be placed in proper order by ID
3. Why not using 4 - the next available empty ID?

Best regards,
Krzysztof