[PATCH 2/8] dt-bindings: clock: stm32mp1: describes clocks if "st,stm32mp1-rcc-secure"
Marek Vasut
marex at denx.de
Fri Apr 22 09:31:25 PDT 2022
On 4/22/22 17:09, Alexandre Torgue wrote:
> In case of "st,stm32mp1-rcc-secure" (stm32mp1 clock driver with RCC
> security support hardened), "clocks" and "clock-names" describe oscillators
> and are required.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue at foss.st.com>
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/st,stm32mp1-rcc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/st,stm32mp1-rcc.yaml
> index 7a251264582d..bb0e0b92e907 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/st,stm32mp1-rcc.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/st,stm32mp1-rcc.yaml
> @@ -58,14 +58,8 @@ properties:
> - st,stm32mp1-rcc-secure
> - st,stm32mp1-rcc
> - const: syscon
> -
> - clocks:
> - description:
> - Specifies the external RX clock for ethernet MAC.
> - maxItems: 1
> -
> - clock-names:
> - const: ETH_RX_CLK/ETH_REF_CLK
> + clocks: true
> + clock-names: true
It looks like this should rather be a property than a compatible string
-- the compatible string is used by the OS to determine which hardware
is represented by a node, but here it is the same hardware in either
case, "st,stm32mp1-rcc" and "st,stm32mp1-rcc-secure", it is still the
same STM32MP1 RCC block, just configured differently by some bootloader
stage.
So why not just add one-liner property of the RCC block like ?
st,rcc-in-secure-configuration
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list