On 26/03/2024 12:41, Inochi Amaoto wrote: >>> >>> The driver does use this file. >> >> I checked and could not find. Please point me to specific parts of the code. >> > > In cv1800_dmamux_route_allocate. >> + regmap_set_bits(dmamux->regmap, >> + DMAMUX_CH_REG(chid), >> + DMAMUX_CH_SET(chid, devid)); >> + >> + regmap_update_bits(dmamux->regmap, CV1800_SDMA_DMA_INT_MUX, >> + DMAMUX_INT_CH_MASK(chid, cpuid), >> + DMAMUX_INT_CH_BIT(chid, cpuid)); > > I think this is. So where exactly? I don't see any define being used here. CV1800_SDMA_DMA_INT_MUX is not in your header. DMAMUX_ is not in your header. So what are you pointing? I don't understand this communication. Are you mocking me here or what? It's waste of my time. > >>> >>>>> And considering the limitation of this dmamux, maybe only devices that >>>>> require dma as a must can have the dma assigned. >>>>> Due to the fact, I think it may be a long time to wait for this header >>>>> to be used as the binding header. >>>> >>>> I don't understand. You did not provide a single reason why this is a >>>> binding. Reason is: mapping IDs between DTS and driver. Where is this >>>> reason? >>>> >>> >>> It seems like that I misunderstood something. This file provides one-one >>> mapping between the dma device id and cpuid, which is both used in the >>> dts and driver. For dts, it provides device id and cpu id mapping. And >>> for driver, it is used as the directive to tell how to write the mapping >>> register. >> >> So where is it? I looked for DMA_TDM0_RX - nothing. Then DMA_I2C1_RX - >> nothing. Then any "DMA_" - also looks nothing. >> > > It is just the value writed, so I say it is just a one-one mapping. > Maybe I misunderstand the binding meaning? Is the binding a mapping > between the dts and something defind in the driver (not the real > device)? Binding headers contains IDs which are used by the driver and DTS code. Hardware constants are not bindings. Register values, addresses, whatever hardware is using is not a binding. Best regards, Krzysztof
