[PATCH v5 1/3] dt-bindings: clk: tenstorrent: Add tenstorrent,atlantis-prcm

[Anirudh Srinivasan]

On Sat, Feb 7, 2026 at 12:39 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk at kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On 07/02/2026 15:54, Conor Dooley wrote:
> >>>>> suggests picking a more generic name in this case, so isn't
> >>>>> "tenstorrent,atlantis-prcm" okay for that?
> >>>>
> >>>> No, because I don't want to keep guessing this. The docs clearly ask you
> >>>> to post complete bindings, which now became less-complete, but fine.
> >
> > I don't think it actually is "less complete" without the other
> > compatibles. The non-rcpu prcms function differently to the rcpu prcm
> > (they seem to be consumers of clocks that the rcpu produces) and are not
> > supported by the drivers in this series. They're different devices and I
> > think should only be documented when support for them comes along. v4
> > had problems that were caused by trying to document them without
> > actually having driver support figured out.
>
> It's fine without them, but then let's just name the file after that
> only sole compatible.

Okay, thank you for clarifying this. I will just add one compatible
and name the bindings file based on that one.

In the future when I add the remaining compatibles (and driver for
them), should I add them to this same bindings file? Can I rename the
file to have a more generic name then? Is renaming bindings files
okay? Or is this something to worry about for later?

>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof