Subject: Re: [RESEND v2 1/4] dt-bindings: bluetooth: broadcom: Fix clocks check

From: Rob Herring <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2021 09:08:42 -0500

On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 09:27:53AM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> The original binding was mentioning that valid values for the clocks and
> clock-names property were one or two clocks from extclk, txco and lpo,
> with extclk being deprecated in favor of txco.
> 
> However, the current binding lists a valid array as extclk, txco and
> lpo, with either one or two items.
> 
> While this looks similar, it actually enforces that all the device trees
> use either ["extclk"], or ["extclk", "txco"]. That doesn't make much
> sense, since the two clocks are said to be equivalent, with one
> superseeding the other.
> 
> lpo is also not a valid clock anymore, and would be as the third clock
> of the list, while we could have only this clock in the previous binding
> (and in DTs).
> 
> Let's rework the clock clause to allow to have either:
> 
>  - extclk, and mark it a deprecated
>  - txco alone
>  - lpo alone
>  - txco, lpo
> 
> While ["extclk", "lpo"] wouldn't be valid, it wasn't found in any device
> tree so it's not an issue in practice.
> 
> Similarly, ["lpo", "txco"] is still considered invalid, but it's
> generally considered as a best practice to fix the order of clocks.
> 
> Cc: "David S. Miller" <[email-masked]>
> Cc: Jakub Kicinski <[email-masked]>
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <[email-masked]>
> Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <[email-masked]>
> Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard <[email-masked]>
> ---
>  .../bindings/net/broadcom-bluetooth.yaml        | 17 +++++++++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

I've applied this and the rest of the series.

Rob