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.

> 
> -- 
> Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260507212451.3333185-1-arnd@kernel.org?part=1