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 7EFC1450909 for ; Wed, 2 Sep 2026 22:34:56 +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=1788388502; cv=none; b=pzsJuguY8UXirGgJxUeZuk+ZDt0oWm8TT2m1HLC8GWIx77bIDet+503QY0Vw4D6tCiGCQ6im7oLi6iISoDBZp0b709VtV6BrYbKGV6NpGKaEAnRD3bLW6NW7zNJYULIHUbFzjXyheLGPrXUX17gLTejRRLycHbYzaY9Ku1b1mtE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788388502; c=relaxed/simple; bh=wp5LjiWqv4qJtjlJlnwfbG0YFx+mW5VsPeJGKYZqjgk=; h=From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Date: Message-Id; b=qdIThfZJPXJfTzXOQmPsCXDKX6EGhQCd2GC7a9GJcNbFsO9vZZCZOLwCHYc2txafDCc0Bh3l2xrPtLk+K6hCJel33q47HmfjUv9/3ogFKrXIbaxadnzJgG4BTYpBDRADJRWjLW2dM0HUyh0w51GCOUR8hCOnQ6pSZGrZdb7xgUA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=TNIDYx+4; 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="TNIDYx+4" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 52B461F00A3A; Wed, 2 Sep 2026 22:34:55 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1788388495; bh=KZL9S6vMYjDEcfM9iHHw7OSzU9w53wTiFzvS39B+wJA=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=TNIDYx+4d6/+TSeTzseF1IgpfouUOrvOH6mG4klw9mTxihzYd2luTUPAl6HpI83gg wAphvGl4B7h1U74kdahKmKOImr3kpNcxlSqg7/Z0H9N+ogf5GDUx2cCqofrfYfkCW4 aLjHo/DPgne+hlg55FidGO68xNKseQKZnRC/JQcE1P9dEj85OL3gIoZmJ+yl24jBUH rvWWbHCjtGIhF6+0bZI0qiZMNH0Kfo6eUwyMBa+PLwALtquY5l+Na7F6O8q7ZvE8A0 pS6acWAizZMB+GI4HXgYzra0WdZ/LhbVnNUG+W+i6arg7gItDmL5Blc2kjV/OFxBdd BbQH5inxCEjVw== From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] dt-bindings: nvmem: uniphier-efuse: Add ti,am62p-efuse compatible Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: "Judith Mendez" Cc: conor+dt@kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, robh@kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20260902222759.736124-2-jm@ti.com> References: <20260902222759.736124-1-jm@ti.com> <20260902222759.736124-2-jm@ti.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 02 Sep 2026 22:34:54 +0000 Message-Id: <20260902223455.52B461F00A3A@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] The Device Tree binding groups an unrelated Texas Instruments compa= tible string (`ti,am62p-efuse`) into the Socionext Uniphier eFuse schema st= rictly to reuse a Linux driver, violating the rule that DT bindings must de= scribe hardware. -- commit bf8e60a2409a1898bd121ebca26b279cdf4f85e7 Author: Judith Mendez dt-bindings: nvmem: uniphier-efuse: Add ti,am62p-efuse compatible This commit adds the ti,am62p-efuse compatible string to the Socionext Uniphier eFuse binding. The commit message notes this is done so the existing uniphier-efuse Linux driver can be used to read AM62P efuse registers for silicon revision detection. > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/socionext,uniphier-e= fuse.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/socionext,uniphier-efus= e.yaml > index e27cbae2d63a0..5e1b90fc1ae45 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/socionext,uniphier-efuse.ya= ml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/socionext,uniphier-efuse.ya= ml > @@ -16,7 +16,9 @@ allOf: > =20 > properties: > compatible: > - const: socionext,uniphier-efuse > + enum: > + - socionext,uniphier-efuse > + - ti,am62p-efuse [Severity: Low] Does grouping an unrelated Texas Instruments compatible string into a Socionext binding conflict with the rule that Device Tree schemas must describe hardware blocks rather than software driver mappings? Grouping hardware from different vendors strictly to reuse a Linux driver creates an inaccurate hardware description. --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260902222759.7361= 24-1-jm@ti.com?part=3D1