Quoting Mike Looijmans (2018-03-19 08:04:15) > On 18-03-18 13:52, Rob Herring wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 12:50:08PM +0100, Mike Looijmans wrote: > >> +Required properties: > >> + - compatible: One of "silabs,si514a", "silabs,si514b" "silabs,si514c" > >> according > >> + to the speed grade of the chip. > >> + - reg: I2C device address. > >> + - #clock-cells: From common clock bindings: Shall be 0. > >> + > >> +Optional properties: > >> + - clock-output-names: From common clock bindings. Recommended to be > >> "si544". > > > > What's the point if there is only 1 clock output? > > I have a board with 6 of these chips, and the clock registration fails if > they > don't have unique names. Providing a clock-output-names property was the > easiest way around it. > > Should I just omit the line or change the wording to reflect the above or is > there a better solution (maybe I can use the DT node name as clock name in > the > driver, will look into that)
I would leave clock-output-names for now. One day we can get off of strings in CCF. Soon perhaps. > > > > >> + > >> +Example: > >> + si544: clock-generator@55 { > > > > clock-controller@55 is the standard node name. > > I'll change and post patch v3 > I made some comments on v1. Please fold those into v3.