Re: [PATCH 05/11] dt-bindings: clock: qcom: ipq5332-gcc: Describe clock inputs per compatible

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 24/09/2026 11:15, Kathiravan Thirumoorthy wrote:
> 
> On 9/23/2026 2:17 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 21/09/2026 08:19, Kathiravan Thirumoorthy wrote:
>>> The IPQ5332 and IPQ5424 GCC blocks use different clock input orderings.
>>> Document the clock inputs in compatible-specific schema constraints instead
>>> of using a common clock description.
>>>
>>> Also add the 375 MHz PPE clock generated by the CMN PLL to the IPQ5424
>>> clock input list.
>>>
>>> This keeps the binding aligned with the clock ordering used by the
>>> existing DTS and GCC driver implementations.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Kathiravan Thirumoorthy <kathiravan.thirumoorthy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>>   .../bindings/clock/qcom,ipq5332-gcc.yaml           | 26 +++++++++++++---------
>>>   1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,ipq5332-gcc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,ipq5332-gcc.yaml
>>> index 1230183fc0a9..fb39dffca988 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,ipq5332-gcc.yaml
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,ipq5332-gcc.yaml
>>> @@ -25,14 +25,7 @@ properties:
>>>   
>>>     clocks:
>>>       minItems: 5
>>> -    items:
>>> -      - description: Board XO clock source
>>> -      - description: Sleep clock source
>>> -      - description: PCIE 2lane PHY pipe clock source
>>> -      - description: PCIE 2lane x1 PHY pipe clock source (For second lane)
>>> -      - description: USB PCIE wrapper pipe clock source
>>> -      - description: PCIE 2-lane PHY2 pipe clock source
>>> -      - description: PCIE 2-lane PHY3 pipe clock source
>>
>> You are changing the order which is ABI break. Describe the actual
>> problem to justify such change. Are you saying this was broken since
>> beginning or what exactly is not working here? The driver was added by
>> Qualcomm in 2024, so how did it even work? It's not some 10 yo legacy
>> where we did some mistakes in binding while converting from TXT.
>>
>> Also, I do not get why the list cannot be shared.
> 
> When the bindings was posted, list is combined for both IPQ5332 and 
> IPQ5424. But the driver wasn't updated and it was following the below 
> order, so was DTS, which is not compatible the DT binding description.
> 
> enum {
>          DT_XO,
>          DT_SLEEP_CLK,
>          DT_PCIE30_PHY0_PIPE_CLK,
>          DT_PCIE30_PHY1_PIPE_CLK,
>          DT_PCIE30_PHY2_PIPE_CLK,
>          DT_PCIE30_PHY3_PIPE_CLK,
>          DT_USB_PCIE_WRAPPER_PIPE_CLK,
>          DT_CMN_PLL_NSS_375M_CLK,
> };
> 
> So I'm splitting the description between IPQ5332 and IPQ5424 to matching 
> with the DTS and the driver description.

So we asked back in 2024 to have the common part of the list. I even did
the effort to dig it:

https://lore.kernel.org/all/ruti7hmkxkayzmqfbme6rw6j2vbhlx4ul4ptcckwamcpd4cyfx@owufhxwpvlcj/

Authors implemented it partially, broken drivers. Now you basically
revert what we asked, which is BTW logical option. It's logical and
reasonable, but leaves bitter feeling.

I have feeling there is no accountability and no responsibility of the
IPQ at all.

No, that's not going to work. You cannot come 1.5 year later and revert
what reviewer asked you, even if issue was just by mistake in the first
place. And you should not even try to do that.

NAK

Best regards,
Krzysztof