From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Jerome Brunet" <jbrunet@baylibre.com>
Cc: robh@kernel.org, conor+dt@kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/5] dt-bindings: mfd: x-powers,axp152: Document AXP318W
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2026 14:43:16 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260717144316.7D7371F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260717-axp318-regulator-v4-1-50aff97084dd@baylibre.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] The `x-powers,axp318w` compatible string was omitted from the conditional block that exempts similar PMIC generations from strictly requiring the `interrupts` property.
- [Medium] The regex pattern for regulator nodes allows non-existent switched output nodes (`swout3` through `swout9`) to silently pass validation.
--
--- Patch [1]: [PATCH v4 1/5] dt-bindings: mfd: x-powers,axp152: Document AXP318W ---
commit 08577b06937ca6f13b4a7f204e7f0abb6042c44d
Author: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com>
dt-bindings: mfd: x-powers,axp152: Document AXP318W
The X-Powers AXP318W is a PMIC used on some newer Allwinner devices.
This patch adds the new compatible string, updates the PWM frequency
property list, adds input supply properties, and updates the pattern
for matching switched outputs.
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/x-powers,axp152.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/x-powers,axp152.yaml
> index 45f015d63df16..95b3984fe0f96 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/x-powers,axp152.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/x-powers,axp152.yaml
> @@ -83,6 +83,7 @@ allOf:
> contains:
> enum:
> - x-powers,axp313a
> + - x-powers,axp318w
> - x-powers,axp323
[Severity: Medium]
Should x-powers,axp318w also be added to the earlier conditional block that
exempts PMICs from requiring the interrupts property?
There is another allOf block in this binding that forces interrupts to be
required for all devices except a few specific generations:
- if:
not:
properties:
compatible:
contains:
enum:
- x-powers,axp15060
- x-powers,axp305
- x-powers,axp313a
- x-powers,axp323
then:
required:
- interrupts
Since the AXP318W shares constraints with siblings like axp313a and axp323,
will omitting it from that exemption block cause valid device trees without
an interrupts property to erroneously fail validation?
[ ... ]
> @@ -277,7 +303,7 @@ properties:
> Defines the work frequency of DC-DC in kHz.
>
> patternProperties:
> - "^(([a-f])?ldo[0-9]|dcdc[0-7a-e]|ldo(_|-)io(0|1)|(dc1)?sw|rtc(_|-)ldo|cpusldo|drivevbus|dc5ldo|boost)$":
> + "^(([a-f])?ldo[0-9]|dcdc[0-9a-e]|ldo(_|-)io(0|1)|(dc1)?sw|swout[1-9]|rtc(_|-)ldo|cpusldo|drivevbus|dc5ldo|boost)$":
[Severity: Medium]
Could the swout[1-9] pattern allow invalid switched output nodes to silently
pass validation?
The commit message notes that the PMIC features exactly two switched outputs,
swout1 and swout2. Allowing swout[1-9] might let device trees with invalid
nodes or typos like swout3 pass schema validation incorrectly. Would a tighter
pattern like swout[1-2] be more appropriate here?
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260717-axp318-regulator-v4-0-50aff97084dd@baylibre.com?part=1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-17 14:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-17 14:31 [PATCH v4 0/5] regulator: Add X-Powers AXP318W PMIC support Jerome Brunet
2026-07-17 14:31 ` [PATCH v4 1/5] dt-bindings: mfd: x-powers,axp152: Document AXP318W Jerome Brunet
2026-07-17 14:43 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-07-17 15:36 ` Jerome Brunet
2026-07-17 14:31 ` [PATCH v4 2/5] mfd: axp20x: Add support for AXP318W PMIC Jerome Brunet
2026-07-17 14:48 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-17 14:31 ` [PATCH v4 3/5] mfd: axp20x: Constify axp313 and axp717 cells Jerome Brunet
2026-07-17 14:31 ` [PATCH v4 4/5] mfd: axp20x-i2c: Fix i2c instantiation Jerome Brunet
2026-07-17 14:54 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-17 14:31 ` [PATCH v4 5/5] regulator: axp20x: add support for the AXP318W Jerome Brunet
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20260717144316.7D7371F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=conor+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=jbrunet@baylibre.com \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.