Re: [PATCH net-next v2 03/11] dt-bindings: net: qcom,ipq9574-ppe: Add IPQ5424 PPE support

[Jie Luo <jie.luo@oss.qualcomm.com>]

On 10/12/2026 9:03 PM, netdev-bot+sashiko@kernel.org wrote:
>> @@ -182,7 +179,7 @@ properties:
>>  
>>    ethernet-ports:
>>      patternProperties:
>> -      "^ethernet-port@[1-6]+$":
>> +      "^ethernet-port@[0-9a-f]+$":
>>          type: object
>>          unevaluatedProperties: false
>>          $ref: ethernet-switch-port.yaml#
> [Severity: High]
> 
> The commit message says:
> 
>   Also match all Ethernet port nodes, so that ports out of the supported
>   range are rejected by the reg limits instead of being left unchecked.
> 
> Does this pattern match all the port nodes the schema accepts? The
> referenced ethernet-switch.yaml accepts both spellings for the container
> and for its children:
> 
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/ethernet-switch.yaml:
> patternProperties:
>   '^(ethernet-)?ports$':
>     type: object
>     unevaluatedProperties: false
>     ...
>     patternProperties:
>       '^(ethernet-)?port@[0-9a-f]+$':
>         type: object
>         description: Ethernet switch ports
> ...
> oneOf:
>   - required:
>       - ports
>   - required:
>       - ethernet-ports
> 
> Take a qcom,ipq5424-ppe node with this child:
> 
>   ethernet-ports {
>       port@5 {
>           reg = <5>;
>       };
>   };
> 
> The port@5 child seems to match only the generic "type: object" pattern
> in ethernet-switch.yaml. That means it counts as evaluated and passes
> unevaluatedProperties: false.
> 
> None of the PPE port checks would run on it:
> - the reg minimum and maximum
> - the IPQ5424 "maximum: 3" limit
> - the required clocks and resets
> - the ethernet-switch-port.yaml reference
> 
> A "ports { port@N { ... }; };" container would skip all of the PPE port
> checks in the same way.
> 
> The new IPQ5424 conditional in allOf uses the same
> "^ethernet-port@[0-9a-f]+$" pattern, and only under ethernet-ports, so it
> has the same gap. Later patches in the series don't seem to change these
> patterns.
> 
> Could both this pattern and the IPQ5424 conditional use
> '^(ethernet-)?ports$' and '^(ethernet-)?port@[0-9a-f]+$', as qca8k.yaml,
> mt7530.yaml and lan966x-switch.yaml do?
> 
> [ ... ]

The PPE ports are Ethernet ports, so this binding uses only the
"ethernet-ports" / "ethernet-port@N" names, as required in the earlier
review of this binding. The PPE port checks, including the IPQ5424
"maximum: 3" limit, are meant for these nodes.