Re: [PATCH 2/3] dt-bindings: clock: add qca8386/qca8084 clock and reset definitions

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 01/08/2023 10:53, Luo Jie wrote:
> QCA8386/QCA8084 includes the clock & reset controller that is
> accessed by MDIO bus. Two work modes are supported, qca8386 works
> as switch mode, qca8084 works as PHY mode.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Luo Jie <quic_luoj@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  .../bindings/clock/qcom,nsscc-qca8k.yaml      |  59 ++++++++++
>  include/dt-bindings/clock/qcom,nsscc-qca8k.h  | 102 ++++++++++++++++++
>  include/dt-bindings/reset/qcom,nsscc-qca8k.h  |  76 +++++++++++++
>  3 files changed, 237 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,nsscc-qca8k.yaml
>  create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/clock/qcom,nsscc-qca8k.h
>  create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/reset/qcom,nsscc-qca8k.h
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,nsscc-qca8k.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,nsscc-qca8k.yaml
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..8fb77156070c
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,nsscc-qca8k.yaml
> @@ -0,0 +1,59 @@
> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
> +%YAML 1.2
> +---
> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/clock/qcom,nsscc-qca8k.yaml#
> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
> +
> +title: Qualcomm NSS Clock & Reset Controller on QCA8386/QCA8084
> +
> +maintainers:
> +  - Luo Jie <quic_luoj@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> +
> +description: |
> +  Qualcomm NSS clock control module provides the clocks and resets
> +  on QCA8386(switch mode)/QCA8084(PHY mode)
> +
> +  See also::
> +    include/dt-bindings/clock/qcom,nsscc-qca8k.h
> +    include/dt-bindings/reset/qcom,nsscc-qca8k.h
> +
> +properties:
> +  compatible:
> +    const: qcom,nsscc-qca8k

SoC name is before IP block names. See:
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom-soc.yaml

qca8k is not SoC specific. I don't know what you are documenting here,
but if this is a SoC, then follow SoC rules.

If this is not SoC, it confuses me a bit to use GCC binding.

Anyway, this was not tested, as pointed out by bot... Please test the
code before sending.

Best regards,
Krzysztof