Re: [PATCH] clk: ti: mux: resolve parent clocks by DT index, not by name

Hi Mathieu,

On Fri, Jul 24, 2026 at 04:56:01PM +0200, Mathieu Dubois-Briand wrote:
> On Thu Jul 16, 2026 at 7:49 PM CEST, Brian Masney wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 15, 2026 at 05:09:56PM +0200, Mathieu Dubois-Briand wrote:
> >> Resolve parent clocks by their index into the device tree "clocks"
> >> property rather than matching names as strings. Name-based matching is
> >> fragile because a clock's "clock-output-names" value in its provider
> >> node can differ from the name used to reference it in a consumer node,
> >> and because names must be globally unique across all clock providers.
> >> 
> >> On AM335x, this caused broken clock trees where some clocks failed to
> >> enable because their parents could not be found.
> >> 
> >> Replace of_clk_parent_fill() with a clk_parent_data array that sets
> >> .index to the array position.
> >> 
> >> Fixes: ec7aa25fa483 ("ARM: dts: Use clock-output-names for am3")
> >> Signed-off-by: Mathieu Dubois-Briand <[email protected]>
> >
> > So this only updates of_mux_clk_setup(). of_ti_composite_mux_clk_setup()
> > calls ti_clk_add_component(), which does a name based matching as well.
> > It would be nice to have this consistent within the same driver. I know
> > this is going to require a larger refactor.
> >
> > Otherwise your fix looks correct to me.
> >
> > Brian
> 
> Hi Brian,
> 
> Thanks for your comment.
> 
> Yes, it does make sense to make everything consistent here. I'm not
> really comfortable with this driver, but I can give it a try.
> 
> Just to be sure, are you talking only about drivers/clk/ti/composite.c
> or is it about more files in drivers/clk/ti/? I'm not sure to understand
> the whole interactions between each components here.
> 
> Fixing drivers/clk/ti/composite.c to use clk_parent_data looks easy, I
> can definitely send a patch for that. But you are talking about a larger
> refactor, so I suspect you would like to see more changes.

I think we should just get drivers/clk/ti/composite.c consistent with
itself.

Brian