[PATCH v3 1/2] ti,j721e-system-controller.yaml: Allow audio-refclk as clock-controller child

[Moteen Shah]

Hey Krzysztof,

On 07/04/26 11:23, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 07/04/2026 07:46, Moteen Shah wrote:
>> Hey Krzysztof,
>>
>> On 31/03/26 12:39, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On Mon, Mar 30, 2026 at 03:14:58PM +0530, Moteen Shah wrote:
>>>> The ti,j721e-system-controller binding currently only allows
>>>> clock-controller@ child nodes to reference the ti,am654-ehrpwm-tbclk
>>>> schema. However, the system controller on J721S2 also contains audio
>>> J721S2 or AM62?
>>>
>>>> reference clock controllers (ti,am62-audio-refclk) that use the same
>>>> clock-controller at XXXX naming pattern.
>>>>
>>>> Hence, extend the clock-controller pattern to accept either ehrpwm-tbclk
>>>> or audio-refclk schemas using a oneOf constraint.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Moteen Shah <m-shah at ti.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>    .../bindings/soc/ti/ti,j721e-system-controller.yaml         | 6 ++++--
>>>>    1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/ti/ti,j721e-system-controller.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/ti/ti,j721e-system-controller.yaml
>>>> index f3bd0be3b279..d5d84a8f1257 100644
>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/ti/ti,j721e-system-controller.yaml
>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/ti/ti,j721e-system-controller.yaml
>>>> @@ -53,9 +53,11 @@ patternProperties:
>>>>    
>>>>      "^clock-controller@[0-9a-f]+$":
>>>>        type: object
>>>> -    $ref: /schemas/clock/ti,am654-ehrpwm-tbclk.yaml#
>>>> +    oneOf:
>>>> +      - $ref: /schemas/clock/ti,am654-ehrpwm-tbclk.yaml#
>>>> +      - $ref: /schemas/clock/ti,am62-audio-refclk.yaml#
>>> Alphanumerical order.
>>>
>>> There is no ti,am62 in the top level compatibles, so why am62 is here?
>>> Top level has j721s2 but this ti,am62-audio-refclk.yaml only am62.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Krzysztof
>> The "ti,am62-audio-refclk" compatible refers to a shared audio reference
>> clock IP block that was first introduced/named on AM62 but is present on
>> other TI K3 SoCs as well, including J721S2. The compatible string
>> identifies the IP block, not the SoC family.
>>
>> This is already an established pattern —
>> k3-j784s4-j742s2-main-common.dtsi uses the same compatible for the
>> J784S4/J742S2 audio refclk node.
> Please read carefully writing-bindings doc.
>

I am planning add another compatible for j721s2: "compatible = 
"ti,j721s2-audio-refclk", "ti,am62-audio-refclk""
This will eventually be falling back to am62-audio-refclk's compatible 
for now, since we require the same functionality as 
"ti,am62-audio-refclk" but if in future someone wants j721s2 specific 
change only they can use the new compatible for j721s2 specific usecase. 
Does that sounds okay?

Regards,
Moteen


> Best regards,
> Krzysztof