Re: [PATCH 1/3] dt-bindings: clock: qcom: document the Milos GX clock controller

From: Luca Weiss

Date: Thu Apr 02 2026 - 08:27:51 EST


On Thu Apr 2, 2026 at 10:23 AM CEST, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 07/03/2026 16:30, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> +
>>> +properties:
>>> + compatible:
>>> + enum:
>>> + - qcom,milos-gxclkctl
>>> +
>>> + power-domains:
>>> + description:
>>> + Power domains required for the clock controller to operate
>>> + items:
>>> + - description: GFX power domain
>>> + - description: GPUCC(CX) power domain
>>> +
>>> + '#power-domain-cells':
>>> + const: 1
>>> +
>>> + reg:
>>> + maxItems: 1
>>
>> reg should be the second property, like you have it in "required" part.
>> I guess you copied it from kaanapali-gxclkctl.yaml, so lesson - qcom
>> bindings have acceptable quality, but not good enough to take as correct
>> starting point.
>>
>
> OTOH, why this entire binding cannot be squashed in Kaanapali one?
> What's the difference?

There's no GMXC power domain on Milos. Apart from that they're
compatible from a bindings perspective.

However it can re-use include/dt-bindings/clock/qcom,kaanapali-gxclkctl.h
because the GX_CLKCTL_GX_GDSC definition would be identical.

And also the driver (which can be used as-is) would be identical. In
that driver qcom,kaanapali-gxclkctl.h is used so it makes sense to keep
with the kaanapali header, or not? Making a qcom,milos-gxclkctl.h with
the same definition is not wanted?

Regards
Luca