Re: [PATCH RFC v2 1/9] dt-bindings: iio: frequency: add ad9910

[Conor Dooley]

On Fri, Mar 20, 2026 at 11:21:37AM +0000, Rodrigo Alencar wrote:
> On 26/03/19 05:25PM, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 18, 2026 at 05:56:01PM +0000, Rodrigo Alencar via B4 Relay wrote:
> > > From: Rodrigo Alencar <rodrigo.alencar@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > 
> > > DT-bindings for AD9910, a 1 GSPS DDS with 14-bit DAC. It includes
> > > configurations for clocks, DAC current, reset and basic GPIO control.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Alencar <rodrigo.alencar@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> ...
> 
> > > +
> > > +  clock-names:
> > > +    oneOf:
> > > +      - items:
> > > +          - const: ref_clk
> > 
> > s/_clk//, not like it can be anything else!
> > 
> > > +      - items:
> > > +          - const: ref_clk
> > > +          - const: sync_in
> > > +
> > > +  '#clock-cells':
> > > +    const: 1
> > > +
> > > +  clock-output-names:
> > > +    minItems: 1
> > > +    maxItems: 3
> > > +    items:
> > > +      enum: [ sync_clk, pdclk, sync_out ]
> > 
> > I'd say same here, but then you've got some issues with differentiation,
> > so idk.
> 
> so I've got the names as they are referred in the device pins in the datasheet

Coming back to this one, ye I think it just is less confusing to keep
the _clk ultimately. This looks good then, I think, modulo the RFC-state
of the series.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature