[PATCH v4 1/8] dt-bindings: counter: Add new ti,am62-eqep compatible

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 11/06/2024 00:13, Judith Mendez wrote:
> 
> Hi Krzysztof,
> 
> On 6/10/24 9:58 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 10/06/2024 16:46, Judith Mendez wrote:
>>> Add new compatible ti,am62-eqep for TI K3 devices. If a device
>>> uses this compatible, require power-domains property.
>>>
>>> Since there is only one functional and interface clock for eqep,
>>> clock-names is not really required, so removed from required
>>> section, make it optional for ti,am3352-eqep compatible, and
>>> update the example.
>>>
>>
>> ...
>>
>>
>>>           interrupts = <79>;
>>>       };
>>>   
>>> +  - |
>>> +    #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/irq.h>
>>> +    #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/arm-gic.h>
>>> +    #include <dt-bindings/soc/ti,sci_pm_domain.h>
>>> +
>>> +    bus {
>>> +        #address-cells = <2>;
>>> +        #size-cells = <2>;
>>> +        eqep1: counter at 23210000 {
>>
>> No need for label
>>
>>> +          compatible = "ti,am62-eqep";
>>> +          reg = <0x00 0x23210000 0x00 0x100>;
>>> +          power-domains = <&k3_pds 60 TI_SCI_PD_EXCLUSIVE>;
>>> +          clocks = <&k3_clks 60 0>;
>>> +          interrupts = <GIC_SPI 117 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
>>> +          status = "disabled";
>>
>> Drop... which also points to another comment - since this was no-op and
>> example is basically the same, then just don't add it. No point.
> 
> Ok, then I will drop the new example, thanks.
> 
> BTW..
> In the existing example for ti,am3352-eqep compatible,
> do you know if it is appropriate to drop clock-names
> from the example if it is no longer required?
> 

It does not really matter.

Best regards,
Krzysztof