From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (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 28F893DB63A for ; Fri, 29 May 2026 14:34:23 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1780065265; cv=none; b=qK9MgH9yezolowe4x+Yn+vFHhsj2IY3TrBuMzenwQVVb/XfPZndE5pOhNhwq1fa8bOt0JOAMqfek3HIrq8Okxq8xllz0S6b54khy6IPceYtImARYfmonSrAtkqGXTAmfTW+SvJ4TyJrCmh1E+1T2OsUFc6NQCrnxC7gDIFOafVY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1780065265; c=relaxed/simple; bh=seP5ZOhGVh1Z9YBkV33mohniOYR8b54+BDkeWLjt6vk=; h=From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Date: Message-Id; b=lcH/8pGO5iu/oXuz5CXnMUFepHJf6UQhtLLyTr/wQs+swNvMhMBM58sVEwNiZWAea9zficHdkjSDXLp7x+15/9RKfFwfN81fZoZXSn8eWqnJeopWXiw6tgHzw/i9ChApR85APREie+ea7OhqYgn+qf4tvq24STSVzkvqNd/nPtE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=LGm5xUDW; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="LGm5xUDW" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9AFED1F00893; Fri, 29 May 2026 14:34:23 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1780065263; bh=d8dMryTWwXJLLsJ12ko/t9wXOAO/co0bVBBA+nxJOfo=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=LGm5xUDWfg1Snxkih+pU/G12QljdLouu6hGHS0hyX18nEvnhCpKLupwQaSoyrWg2L nZC1zTc2X4Niu10q92r7WslV4TZI6Mre17VJx32CUMAlLDEIx2LZ0QULqVnsKb73Jl sEAadqwtrBvs6tCYzfvRDDsLTDPdRj2o3hfr1U2uD2SpTo9nrCe82bz+f6Bff4vo6I vPaiSdA7TAZiRjDVoHvBZhmlaMQx/O2rTXr6Mhfc7X4Msu3VqfpZ5oNeRysDHPcXi7 40Hm7DXm9Hmqq8rMiPk+e9s0YkEDHnBGWFIeCRY6Liivcd9vAQNeXm2rdY296WyDG7 937sPTZ5LkJ3A== From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] dt-bindings: clock: Move xlnx,zynqmp-clk to its own schema Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: "Michal Simek" Cc: conor+dt@kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, robh@kernel.org In-Reply-To: <8e9163806c6f6858cca9afcbdf63599ced3422fe.1780063921.git.michal.simek@amd.com> References: <8e9163806c6f6858cca9afcbdf63599ced3422fe.1780063921.git.michal.simek@amd.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Fri, 29 May 2026 14:34:23 +0000 Message-Id: <20260529143423.9AFED1F00893@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 1 potential issue(= s) to consider: - [Low] Splitting the `xlnx,zynqmp-clk` binding into a new schema breaks va= lidation because the parent firmware schema still references the old file. -- commit 1e02d44e7b2b8c89538f05376475e81433856e26 Author: Michal Simek dt-bindings: clock: Move xlnx,zynqmp-clk to its own schema The ZynqMP clock controller binding shares only #clock-cells with the Versal bindings. Move it to a dedicated xlnx,zynqmp-clk.yaml schema. > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/xlnx,versal-clk.yaml= b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/xlnx,versal-clk.yaml > index bef109d163a82..12d060c39bfc4 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/xlnx,versal-clk.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/xlnx,versal-clk.yaml > @@ -17,9 +17,7 @@ description: | > properties: > compatible: > oneOf: > - - enum: > - - xlnx,versal-clk > - - xlnx,zynqmp-clk > + - const: xlnx,versal-clk [Severity: Low] Does this change break schema validation for the parent firmware node? The firmware binding at Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/xilinx/xlnx,zynqmp-firmware.yaml still validates its clock-controller child node using a reference to /schemas/clock/xlnx,versal-clk.yaml#. Since xlnx,zynqmp-clk is removed from this schema, will dtbs_check now fail for device trees like arch/arm64/boot/dts/xilinx/zynqmp-clk-ccf.dtsi that define the clock-controller under the firmware node? --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/cover.1780063921.gi= t.michal.simek@amd.com?part=3D1