Re: [PATCH v9 6/7] clk: clock-wizard: Remove the hardcoding of the clock outputs

[Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>]

Quoting Shubhrajyoti Datta (2021-02-21 22:47:26)
> Hi Stephen,
> 
> On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 6:55 AM Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > Quoting Miquel Raynal (2021-02-18 00:37:15)
> > > Hi Shubhrajyoti,
> > >
> > > Shubhrajyoti Datta <shubhrajyoti.datta@xilinx.com> wrote on Thu, 18 Feb
> > > 2021 10:19:50 +0530:
> > >
> > > > The number of output clocks are configurable in the hardware.
> > > > Currently the driver registers the maximum number of outputs.
> > > > Fix the same by registering only the outputs that are there.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Shubhrajyoti Datta <shubhrajyoti.datta@xilinx.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > v4:
> > > > Assign output in this patch
> > > >
> > > >  drivers/clk/clk-xlnx-clock-wizard.c | 6 ++++--
> > > >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk-xlnx-clock-wizard.c b/drivers/clk/clk-xlnx-clock-wizard.c
> > > > index ed3b0ef..d403a74 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/clk/clk-xlnx-clock-wizard.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/clk/clk-xlnx-clock-wizard.c
> > > > @@ -473,6 +473,7 @@ static int clk_wzrd_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > > >       unsigned long rate;
> > > >       const char *clk_name;
> > > >       struct clk_wzrd *clk_wzrd;
> > > > +     int outputs;
> > > >       struct device_node *np = pdev->dev.of_node;
> > > >
> > > >       clk_wzrd = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*clk_wzrd), GFP_KERNEL);
> > > > @@ -541,6 +542,7 @@ static int clk_wzrd_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > > >               goto err_disable_clk;
> > > >       }
> > > >
> > > > +     outputs = of_property_count_strings(np, "clock-output-names");
> > >
> > > A check on outputs validity is probably welcome.
> > >
> > > Also I usually prefer noutputs or nb_outputs for such variable name,
> > > which implies a number rather than an array, but this is personal taste.
> >
> > Ideally we get rid of clock-output-names and generate them at runtime
> > instead based on some combination of device name and something else.
> 
> Makes sense. However it may break the current binding.
> Do you think that shoud be okay?

I think it is OK given that the current binding is for the staging tree.
The assumption is those bindings aren't stable.