Re: [PATCH v6 5/7] riscv: dts: ultrarisc: Add initial device tree for UltraRISC DP1000

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Low] riscv: dts: ultrarisc: duplicate unit-address in dp1000.dtsi plic node name
--

commit 65da27c69d1760ac79d94c2145794b0d0a24ad1f
Author: Jia Wang <wangjia@ultrarisc.com>

riscv: dts: ultrarisc: Add initial device tree for UltraRISC DP1000

This commit adds the initial base device tree for the UltraRISC DP1000 SoC,
describing the eight CP100 CPU cores, cache hierarchy, and core peripherals.

> diff --git a/arch/riscv/boot/dts/ultrarisc/dp1000.dtsi b/arch/riscv/boot/dts/ultrarisc/dp1000.dtsi
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000000..f8f29df1801f4
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/riscv/boot/dts/ultrarisc/dp1000.dtsi
> @@ -0,0 +1,865 @@

[ ... ]

> +	soc {
> +		compatible = "simple-bus";
> +		ranges;
> +		#address-cells = <2>;
> +		#size-cells = <2>;

[ ... ]

> +		plic: interrupt-controller@9000000@9000000 {
> +			compatible = "ultrarisc,dp1000-plic", "ultrarisc,cp100-plic";
> +			reg = <0x0 0x9000000 0x0 0x4000000>;

[Severity: Low]
Should the plic node name be interrupt-controller@9000000 instead of
interrupt-controller@9000000@9000000?

The duplicated @9000000 suffix causes dtc to fail compilation in
scripts/dtc/checks.c:check_node_name_format() when building any board
device tree that includes dp1000.dtsi:

    if (strchr(get_unitname(node), '@'))
        FAIL(c, dti, node, "multiple '@' characters in node name");

It also causes check_simple_bus_reg() and dtbs_check validation to fail
because the unit-address does not match the reg property address.

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261024-ultrarisc-dts-v6-0-c62994d8a114@ultrarisc.com?part=5