Re: [PATCH 1/6] arm64: dts: qcom: sm8250-hdk: Enable the sdhc_2 port

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Low] arm64: dts: qcom: sm8250-hdk: sd-ufs-cd-pins violates TLMM DT binding schema
--

commit 0b99efa9e9916abab14b14dc1f0beae18f4f1e7f
Author: redstonee <1516235445@qq.com>

arm64: dts: qcom: sm8250-hdk: Enable the sdhc_2 port

This patch adds the default pin configuration state for sdc2 in sm8250.dtsi
and enables the sdhc_2 controller along with its card-detect pin
configuration on the sm8250-hdk board.

> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8250-hdk.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8250-hdk.dts
> index c1c673086df51..5975878ea0fd2 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8250-hdk.dts
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8250-hdk.dts
> @@ -398,6 +398,12 @@ &qupv3_id_1 {
>  
>  &tlmm {
>  	gpio-reserved-ranges = <28 4>, <40 4>;
> +
> +	sd_ufs_cd_pins: sd-ufs-cd-pins {
> +		pins = "gpio77";
> +		function = "gpio";
> +		bias-pull-up;
> +	};
>  };

[Severity: Low]
Does naming this direct child node of &tlmm sd-ufs-cd-pins cause a dtbs_check
schema validation regression?

In Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/qcom,sm8250-pinctrl.yaml,
direct child pin configuration nodes under the tlmm controller must match
the "-state$" pattern (with "-pins$" only allowed for subnodes nested inside
a "-state" node):

  patternProperties:
    "-state$":
      oneOf:
        - $ref: "#/$defs/qcom-sm8250-tlmm-state"
        - patternProperties:
            "-pins$":
              $ref: "#/$defs/qcom-sm8250-tlmm-state"
          additionalProperties: false

Should this node be named with a -state suffix (for example,
sd-ufs-cd-state) to match the binding schema?

[ ... ]

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261022113601.2320940-1-dc_redstone@outlook.com?part=1