Re: [PATCH v4 09/10] dt-bindings: firmware: add arm,ras-cper

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Low] The `memory-region` property uses a `oneOf` block with multiple `items` lists, which causes a meta-schema validation failure during `make dt_binding_check`.
--

commit c89aa0b853ed683df337769736a4dd661095a6ae
Author: Ahmed Tiba <ahmed.tiba@arm.com>

dt-bindings: firmware: add arm,ras-cper

This commit adds a new DeviceTree binding to describe the Arm firmware-first
CPER provider, exposing the Generic Error Status block and an optional ack
buffer. It also adds an entry for the binding in the MAINTAINERS file.

> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,ras-cper.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,ras-cper.yaml
> new file mode 100644
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,ras-cper.yaml
[ ... ]
> +properties:
> +  compatible:
> +    const: arm,ras-cper
> +
> +  memory-region:
> +    oneOf:
> +      - items:
> +          - description:
> +              CPER Generic Error Status block exposed by firmware
> +      - items:
> +          - description:
> +              CPER Generic Error Status block exposed by firmware.
> +          - description:
> +              Optional firmware-owned ack buffer used on platforms
> +              where firmware needs an explicit "ack" handshake before overwriting
> +              the CPER buffer. Firmware watches bit 0 and expects the OS to set it
> +              once the current status block has been consumed.

Does this oneOf block cause a meta-schema validation failure during
make dt_binding_check?

In dt-schema, standard phandle array properties like memory-region require
length limits to be explicitly defined or statically deducible at the top level
of the property definition.

Wrapping the items arrays inside a oneOf block hides these constraints from the
core meta-schema, which prevents the tooling from extracting the implied
maxItems and results in a missing maxItems validation error.

Could this be simplified to use a single items list with minItems: 1 instead
of the oneOf block?

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260518-topics-ahmtib01-ras_ffh_arm_internal_review-v4-0-42698675ba61@arm.com?part=9