On 16/02/2025 10:27, Ivaylo Ivanov wrote:
> On 2/16/25 11:22, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 16/02/2025 10:14, Diederik de Haas wrote:
>>>> +examples:
>>>> + - |
>>>> + #include <dt-bindings/clock/samsung,exynos2200.h>
>>>> +
>>>> + usb_hsphy: phy@10ab0000 {
>>>> + compatible = "samsung,exynos2200-snps-eusb2-phy";
>>>> + reg = <0 0x10ab0000 0 0x10000>;
>>>> + clocks = <&cmu_hsi0 CLK_MOUT_HSI0_USB32DRD>,
>>>> + <&cmu_hsi0 CLK_MOUT_HSI0_NOC>,
>>>> + <&cmu_hsi0 CLK_DOUT_DIV_CLK_HSI0_EUSB>;
>>>> + clock-names = "ref", "apb", "ctrl";
>>>> + #phy-cells = <0>;
>>>> + phys = <&usbcon_phy>;
>>>> + };
>>> Shouldn't the example have at least all the *required* properties?
>>> Same for patch 2 of this series.
>>
>> Yeah, this wasn't ever tested.
>
> Device trees were tested with dtbs_check W=1 but I overlooked testing bindings
> with dt_bindings_check. Anyways this is rather a small problem, will be fixed
> in a v2.
>
This makes the bindings unreviewable and they will be marked as "changes
requested".
Best regards,
Krzysztof
