Re: Re: [PATCH net-next v8 6/6] riscv: dts: eswin: eic7700-hifive-premier-p550: enable Ethernet controller

[李志 <lizhi2@eswincomputing.com>]

> -----Original Messages-----
> From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
> Send time:Thursday, 11/06/2026 09:32:50
> To: lizhi2@eswincomputing.com
> Cc: conor+dt@kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, robh@kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v8 6/6] riscv: dts: eswin: eic7700-hifive-premier-p550: enable Ethernet controller
> 
> Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
> - [Low] Device Tree compiler warning: unit address without `reg` property.
> - [Low] Device Tree schema validation warnings: non-standard node names.
> --
> 
> commit 61fe87b2af33a89c6531d0d7ec8f49899a52057e
> Author: Zhi Li <lizhi2@eswincomputing.com>
> 
> riscv: dts: eswin: eic7700-hifive-premier-p550: enable Ethernet controller
>     
> Enable the on-board Gigabit Ethernet controller on the
> HiFive Premier P550 development board.
> 
> > diff --git a/arch/riscv/boot/dts/eswin/eic7700-hifive-premier-p550.dts b/arch/riscv/boot/dts/eswin/eic7700-hifive-premier-p550.dts
> > index 131ed1fc6b2ed..edd91b04e2515 100644
> > --- a/arch/riscv/boot/dts/eswin/eic7700-hifive-premier-p550.dts
> > +++ b/arch/riscv/boot/dts/eswin/eic7700-hifive-premier-p550.dts
> > @@ -13,11 +13,251 @@ / {
> 
> [ ... ]
> 
> >  	chosen {
> >  		stdout-path = "serial0:115200n8";
> >  	};
> > +
> > +	vcc_1v8: vcc1v8 {
>                  ^^^^^^
> [Severity: Low]
> Should this node be named using the generic regulator-* pattern, such as
> regulator-1v8? The current name might trigger dtbs_check validation warnings
> for the fixed-regulator schema.
> 
> > +		 compatible = "regulator-fixed";
> > +		 regulator-name = "vcc1v8";
> > +		 regulator-always-on;
> 
> [ ... ]
> 
> > diff --git a/arch/riscv/boot/dts/eswin/eic7700.dtsi b/arch/riscv/boot/dts/eswin/eic7700.dtsi
> > index c3ed93008bca1..c77bc8b1b7bc0 100644
> > --- a/arch/riscv/boot/dts/eswin/eic7700.dtsi
> > +++ b/arch/riscv/boot/dts/eswin/eic7700.dtsi
> 
> [ ... ]
> 
> > @@ -202,6 +205,11 @@ pmu {
> >  				<0x00000000 0x0000000f 0xfffffffc 0x000000ff 0x00000078>;
> >  	};
> >  
> > +	xtal24m: oscillator {
>                  ^^^^^^^^^^
> [Severity: Low]
> Would it be better to use the generic clock-* pattern for this node name,
> such as clock-24m? Using oscillator might trigger dtbs_check warnings
> against the fixed-clock binding schema.
> 
> > +		compatible = "fixed-clock";
> > +		#clock-cells = <0>;
> > +	};
> > +
> >  	soc {
> >  		compatible = "simple-bus";
> >  		ranges;
> > @@ -245,6 +253,85 @@ plic: interrupt-controller@c000000 {
> >  			#interrupt-cells = <1>;
> >  		};
> >  
> > +		hsp_power_domain: bus@50400000 {
>                                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^
> [Severity: Low]
> Does this node need a reg property? It has a unit address (@50400000), which
> usually requires a matching reg property. Without it, the devicetree compiler
> might generate a unit_address_vs_reg warning.
> 
> > +			compatible = "simple-pm-bus";
> > +			ranges;
> > +			clocks = <&clk 171>;
> > +			#address-cells = <2>;
> > +			#size-cells = <2>;
> 
It's only for the reviewer to get a full picture of the dts. It will NOT be upstreamed.
As mentioned by Andrew Lunn at:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/64bf6b40-b947-4ffa-8d48-4d6341931327@lunn.ch/