Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] dt-bindings: pinctrl: qcom,pmic-gpio: Add level-shifter function

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] The `qcom,rpmh` and `qcom,pmic-id` properties are globally permitted for all PMIC compatibles instead of being restricted to variants that support level-shifters.
--

commit 146a2c85c7b535972af82ea257bf85404fa5bec0
Author: Fenglin Wu <fenglin.wu@oss.qualcomm.com>

dt-bindings: pinctrl: qcom,pmic-gpio: Add level-shifter function

This commit adds a new level-shifter function to the pmic-gpio binding.
It introduces qcom,rpmh and qcom,pmic-id properties for the pmh0101 variant
to enable communication with the RPMh firmware, along with a custom pinconf
parameter.

> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/qcom,pmic-gpio.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/qcom,pmic-gpio.yaml
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/qcom,pmic-gpio.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/qcom,pmic-gpio.yaml
> @@ -119,6 +119,21 @@ properties:
>        The first cell will be used to define gpio number and the
>        second denotes the flags for this gpio
>  
> +  qcom,rpmh:
> +    description:
> +      Phandle to the RPMh controller device. Required for PMICs when the
> +      bidirectional level shifters is used (e.g., pmh0101), to enable
> +      communication with RPMh firmware for level shifter control.
> +    $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/phandle
> +
> +  qcom,pmic-id:
> +    description:
> +      The ID of the PMIC which supports bidirectional level shifter function.
> +      It is used as the RPMh resource name suffix to request control of the
> +      level shifter to the RPMh firmware.
> +    $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/string
> +    pattern: "^[A-N]_E[0-3]+$"

[ ... ]

> @@ -330,6 +345,22 @@ allOf:
>            contains:
>              enum:
>                - qcom,pmh0101-gpio
> +    then:
> +      properties:
> +        gpio-line-names:
> +          minItems: 18
> +          maxItems: 18
> +        gpio-reserved-ranges:
> +          minItems: 1
> +          maxItems: 9
> +        qcom,rpmh: true
> +        qcom,pmic-id: true

[Severity: Medium]
Does this schema actually restrict qcom,rpmh and qcom,pmic-id to the pmh0101
variant as intended?

Because these properties are defined in the top-level properties block, they
are globally permitted for all PMIC compatibles. Setting them to true in this
then block is a no-op in JSON schema, as affirming a property is allowed
does not forbid it from appearing in unmatched conditionals.

Should the schema explicitly forbid these properties for unsupported variants
so they are not implicitly valid on all PMICs?

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260528-pinctrl-level-shifter-v2-0-3a6a025392bf@oss.qualcomm.com?part=2