Re: [PATCH 9/9] ARM: dts: qcom: msm8974: Drop RPM bus clocks

[Konrad Dybcio]

On 3/23/26 2:17 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> Some nodes are abusingly referencing some of the internal bus clocks,
> that were recently removed in Linux (because the original implementation
> did not make much sense), managing them as if they were the only devices
> on an NoC bus.
> 
> These clocks are now handled from within the icc framework and are
> no longer registered from within the CCF. Remove them.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---

[...]

>  		mmssnoc: interconnect@fc478000 {
>  			reg = <0xfc478000 0x4000>;
>  			compatible = "qcom,msm8974-mmssnoc";
>  			#interconnect-cells = <1>;
> -			clock-names = "bus", "bus_a";
> -			clocks = <&mmcc MMSS_S0_AXI_CLK>,
> -				 <&mmcc MMSS_S0_AXI_CLK>;
> +			clock-names = "bus";
> +			clocks = <&mmcc MMSS_S0_AXI_CLK>;

x
x-names

please

>  		};
>  
>  		cnoc: interconnect@fc480000 {
>  			reg = <0xfc480000 0x4000>;
>  			compatible = "qcom,msm8974-cnoc";
>  			#interconnect-cells = <1>;
> -			clock-names = "bus", "bus_a";
> -			clocks = <&rpmcc RPM_SMD_CNOC_CLK>,
> -				 <&rpmcc RPM_SMD_CNOC_A_CLK>;
>  		};
>  
>  		tsens: thermal-sensor@fc4a9000 {
> @@ -2223,6 +2207,7 @@ sram@fdd00000 {
>  			      <0xfec00000 0x180000>;
>  			reg-names = "ctrl", "mem";
>  			ranges = <0 0xfec00000 0x180000>;
> +			// core clock is unused, kept for ABI compliance

Do we still enforce C-style comments?

Also "unused" is not really right.. After the 'revolution', SMD_RPM_CC
no longer ""provides"" that clock in reality, since it was never a "clock"
but rather an interconnect resource

Konrad

>  			clocks = <&rpmcc RPM_SMD_OCMEMGX_CLK>,
>  				 <&mmcc OCMEMCX_OCMEMNOC_CLK>;
>  			clock-names = "core", "iface";
>