Re: [PATCH v4 01/10] dt-bindings: display: rockchip: analogix-dp: Allow hclk as third clock

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] Missing SoC-specific constraints for the 3rd clock name allows invalid device trees to pass validation.
--

commit 0bc96bc26fc1f3dd540199a17da2a7642320b4c1
Author: Damon Ding <damon.ding@rock-chips.com>
dt-bindings: display: rockchip: analogix-dp: Allow hclk as third clock

This commit expands the clock-names property to allow hclk as a third
clock for the RK3588 eDP controller. This explicitly defines the video
output bus clock requirement instead of relying on implicit clock
enablement from the GRF phandle.

> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/rockchip/rockchip,analogix-dp.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/rockchip/rockchip,analogix-dp.yaml
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/rockchip/rockchip,analogix-dp.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/rockchip/rockchip,analogix-dp.yaml
> @@ -26,7 +26,9 @@ properties:
>      items:
>        - const: dp
>        - const: pclk
> -      - const: grf
> +      - enum:
> +          - grf
> +          - hclk

The commit message notes that grf is used for older SoCs and hclk is used
for RK3588.

Does updating the top-level items list without adding SoC-specific
constraints allow older SoCs to pass validation when using hclk, and
allow RK3588 to pass validation when using grf?

If an RK3588 device tree incorrectly uses grf, would it silently pass schema
validation, even though the driver explicitly looks for hclk?

Could the existing conditional block for rockchip,rk3588-edp (and corresponding
constraints for older compatibles) be updated to enforce which clock name is
valid for each SoC?

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260512095644.1946084-1-damon.ding@rock-chips.com?part=1