Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: mfd: Add MT6397 sound DAI cells

[Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>]

On Mon, Sep 21, 2026 at 11:36:45PM +0000, sashiko-bot@kernel.org wrote:
> Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
> - [Medium] dt-bindings: mfd: missing conditional enforcement and example for #sound-dai-cells
> --
> 
> commit 81069b8500a138169e7ffa4f54dfcaa00429702d
> Author: Rob Herring (Arm) <robh@kernel.org>
> 
> dt-bindings: mfd: Add MT6397 sound DAI cells
> 
> This commit documents the sound DAI cell provided by MT6397 PMIC nodes.
> 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/mediatek,mt6397.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/mediatek,mt6397.yaml
> > index 3cbc0dc12c319..e2caa049a60ba 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/mediatek,mt6397.yaml
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/mediatek,mt6397.yaml
> > @@ -57,6 +57,9 @@ properties:
> >    "#interrupt-cells":
> >      const: 2
> >  
> > +  "#sound-dai-cells":
> > +    const: 1
> > +
> 
> [Severity: Medium]
> Does adding this at the top-level properties block bypass conditional
> enforcement for specific variants?
> 
> By placing "#sound-dai-cells" at the top level without an allOf: if-then
> conditional block restricted to "mediatek,mt6397", the schema fails to enforce
> it as a required property for the MT6397 PMIC, and incorrectly allows it for
> other PMIC variants. 

No clue about the capabilities of each variant, but I would guess if one 
has audio codec, then they all do.

> Should it be added to the required list for MT6397 and included in the MT6397
> example block, as per DT subsystem guidelines for new provider capabilities?

Perfectly fine to use this h/w and not use the audio functionality. 
Also, new required properties can be an ABI break.

Rob