Re: [PATCH V3 4/5] dt-bindings: mmc: fsl-imx-esdhc: add clock bindings

[Rob Herring]

On Fri, Mar 5, 2021 at 8:09 AM Aisheng Dong <aisheng.dong@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Rob,
>
> > From: Peng Fan (OSS) <peng.fan@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2021 11:10 AM
> >
> > From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@xxxxxxx>
> >
> > Add clock bindings for fsl-imx-esdhc yaml
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@xxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  .../devicetree/bindings/mmc/fsl-imx-esdhc.yaml        | 11 +++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/fsl-imx-esdhc.yaml
> > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/fsl-imx-esdhc.yaml
> > index a7fbd8cc1e38..369471814496 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/fsl-imx-esdhc.yaml
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/fsl-imx-esdhc.yaml
> > @@ -103,6 +103,17 @@ properties:
> >        Only eMMC HS400 mode need to take care of this property.
> >      default: 0
> >
> > +  clocks:
> > +    maxItems: 3
> > +    description:
> > +      Handle clocks for the sdhc controller.
> > +
> > +  clock-names:
> > +    items:
> > +      - const: ipg
> > +      - const: ahb
> > +      - const: per
>
> One question:
> The side effect of this patch is that it imposes a forced order of clk names
> In DT which actually was not needed.
>
> Do we really have to do that?

Yes.

> Or any other better approach to allow a random order to match the DT
> usage better?

Why do you need random order?

We can not enforce the order, but we only do that when there's
multiple optional entries.

Rob