On 19/12/2024 11:51, Charles Keepax wrote: > On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 09:48:05AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 18, 2024 at 08:46:31PM -0600, Paul Handrigan wrote: >>> +/* DEVICE_ID2 */ >>> +#define CS2600_AREVID_MASK GENMASK(7, 4) >>> +#define CS2600_MTLRVID_MASK GENMASK(3, 0) >>> + >>> +/* UNLOCK_INDICATORS */ >>> +#define CS2600_P_UNLOCK_STICKY BIT(3) >>> +#define CS2600_P_UNLOCK BIT(2) >>> +#define CS2600_F_UNLOCK_STICKY BIT(1) >>> +#define CS2600_F_UNLOCK BIT(0) >>> + >>> +/* ERROR_STS */ >>> +#define CS2600_ERR_DEV_DEFECT BIT(7) /* Device defective */ >>> +#define CS2600_ERR_OTP_CORRUPT BIT(6) >>> +#define CS2600_ERR_REG_CFG BIT(5) /* Invalid register config */ >>> +#define CS2600_ERR_PLL_DISABLED BIT(4) >>> +#define CS2600_ERR_HW_CFG BIT(3) /* Invalid HW Config */ >>> +#define CS2600_ERR_REFCLK_MISSING BIT(2) >>> +#define CS2600_ERR_CLKIN_UNSTABLE BIT(1) >>> +#define CS2600_ERR_CLKIN_MISSING BIT(0) >>> + >>> +#define CS2600_PLL_OUT 0 >>> +#define CS2600_CLK_OUT 1 >>> +#define CS2600_BCLK_OUT 2 >>> +#define CS2600_FSYNC_OUT 3 >> >> No, the entire point of the binding header is to bind. Drop all four >> above and use properly your header. >> >> Otherwise I claim your binding header is not used or not really a >> binding. >> > > This excert is from the drivers internal header not the binding > header? I replied in patch two, stripping unnecessary context. There is no binding header here, so I do not understand your comment. Best regards, Krzysztof
