On Sat, May 09, 2026 at 09:31:24AM -0700, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org> writes:
> 
> > On Fri, May 08, 2026 at 09:32:54PM +0000, sashiko-bot@kernel.org wrote:
> >> Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
> >> - [Low] Typo in the binding description: 'STLC5460' is used instead of 'STLC4560'.
> >> - [Low] The `interrupts-extended` and `powerdown-gpios` specifiers in the example lack standard secondary cells (flags/triggers).
> >> --
> >> 
> >> commit b803e7cb976e6f9f5ea1b9d2c76cdffbb8fe0d67
> >> Author: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> >> 
> >> dt-bindings: net: add st,stlc4560/p54spi binding
> >> 
> >> This commit adds a device tree binding for the SPI version of the Prism54
> >> wireless device. It documents the known names of this device and the
> >> properties sufficient for its use.
> >> 
> >> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/e8dc9acb-6f85-e0a9-a145-d101ca6da201@gmail.com/
> >> 
> >> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/st,stlc4560.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/st,stlc4560.yaml
> >> > new file mode 100644
> >> > index 0000000000000..a32265c07350d
> >> > --- /dev/null
> >> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/st,stlc4560.yaml
> >> > @@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
> >> > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
> >> > +%YAML 1.2
> >> > +---
> >> > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/net/wireless/st,stlc4560.yaml#
> >> > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
> >> > +
> >> > +title: ST/Intersil/Conexant stlc45xx/p54spi/cx3110x SPI wireless device
> >> > +
> >> > +maintainers:
> >> > +  - Christian Lamparter <chunkeey@gmail.com>
> >> > +
> >> > +description:
> >> > +  The SPI variant of the Intersil Prism54 wireless device was sold
> >> > +  under a variety of names, including Conexant CX3110x and
> >> > +  ST Microelectronics STLC5460.
> >> 
> >> This isn't a bug, but there's a typo in the description (STLC5460 instead
> >> of STLC4560).
> >> 
> >> [ ... ]
> >> 
> >> > +examples:
> >> > +  - |
> >> > +    spi {
> >> > +        #address-cells = <1>;
> >> > +        #size-cells = <0>;
> >> > +
> >> > +        wifi@0 {
> >> > +            compatible = "st,stlc4560";
> >> > +            reg = <0>;
> >> > +            spi-max-frequency = <48000000>;
> >> > +            interrupts-extended = <&gpio 23>;
> >> > +            powerdown-gpios = <&gpio 1>;
> >> 
> >> Do these specifiers need standard secondary cells for flags and triggers?
> >> 
> >> Real-world GPIO controllers typically require #gpio-cells = <2> or
> >> #interrupt-cells = <2> to specify trigger types and active levels. While
> >> dt_binding_check accepts this since the phandle cell sizes are unknown,
> >> copying this example into a real device tree will result in a compilation
> >> error.
> >
> > Can we make this thing not whinge about stuff like this? It's an
> > /example/ and these fields cannot be copy-pasted anyway.
> 
> If you have an idea how to convert it into a rule, I'm happy to merge it
> into prompts. Something like "fields X and Y are not required for
> example dt records". Sorry, it's really far from my area of expertise, so
> I don't know what's right here and what's not.

"Ignore phandle arguments in examples, when the phandle doesn't
reference a node in the example"? Although, probably can go as far as
"ignore phandle arguments in examples", since Rob's bot does
validation on examples, and should catch a mismatch where the target of
phandle exists.

I dunno if "argument" is the correct word for the RHS of the property.