[PATCH 02/15] dt-bindings: clock: mediatek: regroup MT8188 dt-bindings into MT8186

[Rob Herring]

On Wed, Jul 8, 2026 at 8:45 AM Louis-Alexis Eyraud
<louisalexis.eyraud at collabora.com> wrote:
>
> Hello Rob,
>
> On Wed, 2026-07-01 at 14:33 -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 01, 2026 at 03:11:07PM +0200, Louis-Alexis Eyraud wrote:
> > > Regroup the MT8188 clock and system clock dt-bindings into MT8186
> > > ones
> > > to ease maintainability and have common files for several currently
> > > supported SoC or new future ones, that have the same kind of clock
> > > controller design.
> > >
> > > Note:
> > > The `#clock-cells` property is a required property for all
> > > compatibles
> > > declared in MT8188 clock and system clock dt-bindings but not in
> > > MT8186
> > > ones.
> > > To avoid ABI breakage, conditional blocks to check this requirement
> > > for MT8188 compatibles are added, rather than enforcing it for
> > > MT8186
> > > compatibles.
> >
> > If the existing DTs are just wrong, then I would just make #clock-
> > cells
> > required. But please update the .dts files so the warnings don't
> > grow.
> >
> I've tested to make the #clock-cells required for the MT8186, MT8192
> and MT8195 system and functional clock controllers.
> I did not see new warnings, so no extra dts patches would be needed.
>
> I'll add new patches (one per SoC) in the next revision of the series
> for this, as it simplifies the grouping patches (no more if/then to
> require #clock-cells for the MT8188/MT8189 clock controllers) and the
> note in commit message could be removed.
>
> > The grouping I would do here is:
> >
> > - clock controller only
> > - reset controller only
> > - both clock and reset controller
> >
> > That should avoid any if/then schemas.
> >
>
> By this grouping, I understand you suggest having separate dt-bindings
> files, that could look like:
> - mediatek,mt8186-clock.yaml: clock controllers
> - <name to be found>: reset controllers
> - <name to be found>: clock controllers with reset controller
> - mediatek,mt8186-sys-clock.yaml: system clock controllers.
> - <name to be found>: system clock controllers with reset controller
>
> Is that what you meant?

I think so, but not sure I understand the distinction with clock
controllers and system clock controllers.

> There is no pure reset controllers for those SoC so no dedicated file
> would needed at the moment.
> The system clock controllers all have reset-controllers, even they may
> currently be not all implemented, so no separate files for system clock
> controllers would needed as well.
>
> Also, from what I see the current dt-bindings, the system clocks
> controllers for the MT8186/MT8188/MT8192/MT8195 SoC have the #reset-
> cells property but it is not required for them (examples:
> mediatek,mt8188-infracfg-ao or mediatek,mt8195-infracfg_ao).
>
> With the patches to make the #clock-cells property required, I already
> removed the biggest if/else block in mediatek,mt8186-clock.yaml, so
> only the one regarding #reset-cells property remains.
>
> So, should I create separate files, following the grouping suggestion,
> for the v2 of this patch?

Shrug. There's no hard rule here, it's a judgment call. With one
if/then block dropped, it's a bit more tolerable to keep it as-is. If
the if/then schemas are as long as the rest of the schema (minus any
example), then I would say to split the schemas.

Rob