Re: [PATCH v14 2/9] dt-bindings: remoteproc: qcom: document hexagon based WCSS secure PIL

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] Incorrect placement of `minItems` and `maxItems` inside the `items` list for `qcom,smem-states`.
- [Low] Copy-paste error in the description for `glink-edge` referencing the 'Modem'.
--

--- Patch [2]: [PATCH v14 2/9] dt-bindings: remoteproc: qcom: document hexagon based WCSS secure PIL ---
commit 8f051c37adcc2888cdf46122f432edbd580d36be
Author: Manikanta Mylavarapu <manikanta.mylavarapu@oss.qualcomm.com>

dt-bindings: remoteproc: qcom: document hexagon based WCSS secure PIL

Add new binding document for hexagon based WCSS secure PIL remoteproc.
IPQ5018, IPQ5332 and IPQ9574 follow secure PIL remoteproc.

> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/qcom,ipq5018-wcss-sec-pil.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/qcom,ipq5018-wcss-sec-pil.yaml
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000000..1ec8df60d9633
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/qcom,ipq5018-wcss-sec-pil.yaml

[ ... ]

> +  mboxes:
> +    items:
> +      - description: TMECom mailbox
> +
> +  qcom,smem-states:
> +    $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/phandle-array
> +    description: States used by the AP to signal the remote processor
> +    items:
> +      - minItems: 2
> +      - maxItems: 2

[Severity: Medium]
Is it intentional to place minItems and maxItems as elements inside the items
array?

By placing them inside the items array, the dt-schema validator treats them as
schemas for the individual elements of the phandle array (i.e. the first tuple
is validated against {minItems: 2} and the second against {maxItems: 2}).

If the intent is to restrict the length of the qcom,smem-states array itself
to 2 items, should these be sibling properties to items rather than inside it?

> +
> +  qcom,smem-state-names:
> +    description:
> +      Names of the states used by the AP to signal the remote processor

[ ... ]

> +  memory-region:
> +    items:
> +      - description: Q6 reserved region
> +
> +  glink-edge:
> +    $ref: /schemas/remoteproc/qcom,glink-edge.yaml#
> +    description:
> +      Qualcomm G-Link subnode which represents communication edge, channels
> +      and devices related to the Modem.

[Severity: Low]
This isn't a bug, but should the description reference "WCSS" instead of
"Modem"?

Since this binding is for the Wireless Connectivity Subsystem, mentioning the
Modem appears to be a leftover from a copy-paste of a modem remoteproc binding.

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260803-rproc-v14-0-a1f87b0b0ad2@oss.qualcomm.com?part=2