From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 93E7C3822BE for ; Mon, 18 May 2026 17:09:35 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1779124175; cv=none; b=qA1gBbdX5J66QZTredw66RoOM7DCOXJs5d6WQcE5xqquTTAAbxDiunBYEXtAkHdYK6exC7mPUwolBYjq3BcBdRU2h/OyANbwhOaNRJHjEtR1Jfg4qWG7jXOKhBRToaCNfAn4aqN1eB6xiLCP5LDtQcfCdUUHHxfvLnH/9KJp1aw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1779124175; c=relaxed/simple; bh=MU9oD6ZknNtzEgnVFt5sDL5QMgVi9OeLrG2xY1aLweg=; h=From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Date: Message-Id; b=oBdfckIyqq00ViociFTxc6Oh4Y+RvADXqcN3tRirl2i6cVNkLM8oUiVazKESYo9tZV+IjnSZrJolLV5gqjNBi9dMh1p42LPwoDXi4HXxca64S1LdSGA1KNZw9j1ixNyHo6SJDJt1cFJxFh3sz3DTGqOFmopxyuTAhQZ7UKtGEzc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=THIZaXV+; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="THIZaXV+" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BBBA4C2BCB7; Mon, 18 May 2026 17:09:34 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1779124175; bh=MU9oD6ZknNtzEgnVFt5sDL5QMgVi9OeLrG2xY1aLweg=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=THIZaXV+E8uvpH6zULbV8QvYgbS+kWfx/wi8m3y1yudQT1AADQa9WjcsKnu1a7Nxr Ld5gQw0x8tvHyXMcUhajAmjZZfM3TYUcR54+Bu2N11QFAo7eYpmwEa2HUgLK9qTPXC AjwvjJRimR+L6meDj45w7glvnIiRmWO5n7ju1ULOkec25/POLgdUjOqSPgoZ95qQ2J ors07fRtFV7jvMKx96CcWdasRXrZ1nmuS0ZkoIDblnMRKLQ9OBc5KL3dSz3U9BGdqW 9/37XuWsDwbnuSDFed4r6ooOBDccf1cSwiRac/rTa10ME59OzMuzuaBaqiEgmKHCwn R3v7XjYnT6q9w== From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH V1 2/3] dt-bindings: phy: qcom,sc8280xp-qmp-ufs-phy: Document the Hawi UFS controller Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: palash.kambar@oss.qualcomm.com Cc: conor+dt@kernel.org, neil.armstrong@linaro.org, olteanv@gmail.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, robh@kernel.org, vkoul@kernel.org, linux-phy@lists.infradead.org In-Reply-To: <20260518165346.1732548-3-palash.kambar@oss.qualcomm.com> References: <20260518165346.1732548-3-palash.kambar@oss.qualcomm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Mon, 18 May 2026 17:09:34 +0000 Message-Id: <20260518170934.BBBA4C2BCB7@smtp.kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(= s) to consider: - [Medium] The commit title specifies the wrong subsystem and filename rela= tive to the actual diff. - [Medium] The new compatible string 'qcom,hawi-ufshc' is omitted from the = `if-then` conditional block that enforces the MCQ register range constraint= s. -- commit 1742ce0580b168eb19f1dc60a097e13ccbf8098d Author: Palash Kambar dt-bindings: phy: qcom,sc8280xp-qmp-ufs-phy: Document the Hawi UFS controll= er =20 Document the UFS Controller on the Hawi Platform. > dt-bindings: phy: qcom,sc8280xp-qmp-ufs-phy: Document the Hawi UFS contro= ller This isn't a bug, but the commit title specifies the wrong subsystem and filename. It claims to modify the PHY binding qcom,sc8280xp-qmp-ufs-phy, but the patch actually modifies the UFS host controller binding Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,sm8650-ufshc.yaml. > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,sm8650-ufshc.yaml= b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,sm8650-ufshc.yaml > index f28641c6e68fe..3de00affa4c64 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,sm8650-ufshc.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,sm8650-ufshc.yaml [ ... ] > @@ -27,6 +28,7 @@ properties: > items: > - enum: > - qcom,eliza-ufshc > + - qcom,hawi-ufshc > - qcom,kaanapali-ufshc > - qcom,sm8650-ufshc > - qcom,sm8750-ufshc Does this code omit qcom,hawi-ufshc from the conditional block further down= in the file that enforces the MCQ register range constraints? Looking at the allOf block in this file: allOf: - $ref: qcom,ufs-common.yaml - if: properties: compatible: contains: enum: - qcom,eliza-ufshc then: properties: reg: minItems: 2 reg-names: minItems: 2 If the Hawi platform shares the same hardware constraints and requires the = MCQ registers, could this regression allow incomplete device trees missing the = MCQ registers to silently pass schema validation by being omitted from this blo= ck? --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260518165346.1732= 548-1-palash.kambar@oss.qualcomm.com?part=3D2