From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5569E3ACEF2 for ; Mon, 31 Aug 2026 03:09:56 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788145798; cv=none; b=GBYPWBnBKdJRvQHMk0IWsZuVz10izZ1WPPCwpf5IpQFWd4X3j/+cTOw0l84pts2nZbGgAeqeANcRt+h6mgcGaCBce+A/rsjU0PpxHVI1UkG0bHfcdD3aID3RqTiIG6TiE9xoNBBFXOBREzcQfmfAvkLv90wG812a4LOOgEFg4BE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788145798; c=relaxed/simple; bh=UcVdLIhVLLocwBPgqgynFiaqHyJaXkQJN7i3kceIwOc=; h=From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Date: Message-Id; b=YGP3fiC5t25Hhspab5cQGvtfzObY9rDnbsPor7Wp1mTDkvqNLbpjmn3N72qywUrETMtDQ3o2BqfyRewSF6uUnHSV4vmZz0NZxDMIrj1JbtgMgSFeIMPt4QVr3q6yBDShcGVtOZM1ebWpqkCCxcRIIsm1y9M1dOsfok3BAlz4U6E= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=OmTu4kok; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="OmTu4kok" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 470BB1F000E9; Mon, 31 Aug 2026 03:09:56 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1788145796; bh=7EwDuDpF3GYu2HkvzbD6lNHuPI8ONWk90oN5k6oWETE=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=OmTu4kokKGWDzwtifGuay5e4rNe6ly0fG//W/oJ/AiLwx1TzSBiJ240Mp2kp1V61y /mAZlnhoy0UYFR4myG4IOWe3c2sMmbPeSRsSw/+DC5p2L4VOhxDPKvHhyYiyW2nZvW Zm9/jml8d0sewmxyV9ZUm7tgSuanPqLVTgbQSD8qPE9RcCrMmBMIqxGb1rn4XjYSvH /xRVYjwpLCLHBvK0dpyffA76dPmvk/tLnZbvpFKoyB5bbpQ9comUeUrFTgQfojaCwy 1tDuNpoCD/Dd9Y12zUwBSJhtcV2Ne9OZlVmStKjjK/Wc4WdNxZJMG4rC91sUSkv4dv eGT20pTpCtIlg== From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/8] dt-bindings: soc: qcom: eud: Add per-path child nodes for UTMI routing Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: "Elson Serrao" Cc: robh@kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, conor+dt@kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20260831030147.1500616-2-elson.serrao@oss.qualcomm.com> References: <20260831030147.1500616-1-elson.serrao@oss.qualcomm.com> <20260831030147.1500616-2-elson.serrao@oss.qualcomm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2026 03:09:55 +0000 Message-Id: <20260831030956.470BB1F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(= s) to consider: - [Low] Missing `#address-cells` and `#size-cells` in the `required` list o= f conditional blocks for configurations that use child nodes with unit addr= esses (`eud-path@X`). -- commit 4ec64fc010ea8502aae975163886af215d1fa042 Author: Elson Serrao dt-bindings: soc: qcom: eud: Add per-path child nodes for UTMI routing This commit modifies the EUD binding to model UTMI paths as separate child nodes (eud-path@X) with their own OF graph, replacing the flattened ports representation. It introduces the qcom,sm8350-eud compatible for dual-path topologies and conditionally maintains legacy support for sc7280. > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/qcom,eud.yaml b/D= ocumentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/qcom,eud.yaml > index 84218636c0d8d..c377a77d623cf 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/qcom,eud.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/qcom,eud.yaml [ ... ] > @@ -45,10 +46,88 @@ properties: > +allOf: > + - if: > + properties: > + compatible: > + contains: > + const: qcom,sc7280-eud > + then: > + oneOf: > + - required: > + - ports > + properties: > + eud-path@0: false > + eud-path@1: false > + - required: > + - eud-path@0 [Severity: Low] Does this configuration need to require #address-cells and #size-cells for the parent node? Since the eud-path@0 child node has a unit address, failing to mandate the cell size properties in this branch allows configurations to omit them, passing schema validation silently even though the structure is invalid. > + properties: > + ports: false > + eud-path@1: false > + - if: > + properties: > + compatible: > + contains: > + const: qcom,sm8350-eud > + then: > + required: > + - eud-path@0 > + - eud-path@1 [Severity: Low] Should this branch also explicitly require #address-cells and #size-cells? Similar to the sc7280 case above, the sm8350 variant strictly requires child nodes with unit addresses. Without mandating the cell size properties in the required list, a device tree could miss them and still pass YAML validation. > + properties: > + ports: false --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260831030147.1500= 616-1-elson.serrao@oss.qualcomm.com?part=3D1