On Thu, 05 Jul 2018, Matti Vaittinen wrote: > On Thu, Jul 05, 2018 at 11:49:19AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > > On Thu, 05 Jul 2018, Matti Vaittinen wrote: > > > On Thu, Jul 05, 2018 at 10:24:44AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > > > > On Thu, 05 Jul 2018, Matti Vaittinen wrote: > > > > > > > > > Document devicetree bindings for ROHM BD71837 PMIC MFD. > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Matti Vaittinen <[email protected]> > > > > > Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <[email protected]> > > > > > --- > > > > > .../devicetree/bindings/mfd/rohm,bd71837-pmic.txt | 67 > > > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > > 1 file changed, 67 insertions(+) > > > > > create mode 100644 > > > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/rohm,bd71837-pmic.txt > > > > > + clock-names = "my-clock"; > > > > > + clocks = <&pmic>; > > > > > + }; > > > > > > > > Do you have a real example to give? > > > > > > For clock consumer? Sorry, no I don't. > > > > Might be better to drop it for the time being then. > > I have tested the clk driver using this dummy consumer. So in a sense it > "works" and can be used as an example on how to write a real clock > consumer node. Thus I see some value in this example node - even if it > does not match to any real world HW. If I had to use the clk from this > PMIC and write HW description I would appreciate this dummy exaple. I > can drop it if you insist - but I would at least like to hear what is > the downside on having it here?
My suggestion then would be to make it look as authentic as possible. It is only an example, so it doesn't *really* matter, but the current foo,bar one just looks a bit crumby. -- Lee Jones [李琼斯] Linaro Services Technical Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
