Re: [PATCH v3 02/12] dt-bindings: clock: qcom,qcm2290-dispcc: Add DSI1 PHY and sleep clocks

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [High] Adding new items to the 'clocks' and 'clock-names' arrays without specifying a 'minItems' constraint breaks backward compatibility with existing device trees.
--

commit 85e4a2f46a61d48ee9c66caba34fbc7a3fa61a61
Author: Imran Shaik <imran.shaik@oss.qualcomm.com>

dt-bindings: clock: qcom,qcm2290-dispcc: Add DSI1 PHY and sleep clocks
    
Update the QCM2290 DISPCC binding to document additional clock inputs
supported by the hardware, including DSI1 PHY byte/pixel clocks and
the sleep clock, alongside the existing clock list. This is an ABI
extension, and existing clock inputs ordering is unchanged.

> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,qcm2290-dispcc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,qcm2290-dispcc.yaml
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,qcm2290-dispcc.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,qcm2290-dispcc.yaml
> @@ -25,8 +25,11 @@ properties:
>        - description: Board active-only XO source
>        - description: GPLL0 source from GCC
>        - description: GPLL0 div source from GCC
> -      - description: Byte clock from DSI PHY
> -      - description: Pixel clock from DSI PHY
> +      - description: Byte clock from DSI PHY0
> +      - description: Pixel clock from DSI PHY0
> +      - description: Byte clock from DSI PHY1
> +      - description: Pixel clock from DSI PHY1
> +      - description: Board sleep clock

[Severity: High]
Does adding these items to the clocks array without specifying a minItems
constraint cause a regression for backward compatibility with existing device
trees?

The commit message states "This is an ABI extension", but in dt-schema,
specifying an items list for an array implicitly sets both minItems and
maxItems to the length of the list unless overridden. Expanding the clocks
list from 6 to 9 items without adding minItems: 6 will result in dtbs_check
errors for older device trees that only provide 6 clocks.

>  
>    clock-names:
>      items:
> @@ -36,6 +39,9 @@ properties:
>        - const: gcc_disp_gpll0_div_clk_src
>        - const: dsi0_phy_pll_out_byteclk
>        - const: dsi0_phy_pll_out_dsiclk
> +      - const: dsi1_phy_pll_out_byteclk
> +      - const: dsi1_phy_pll_out_dsiclk
> +      - const: sleep_clk

[Severity: High]
Similarly, does the clock-names array also need a minItems: 6 constraint?

Without it, the schema will strictly enforce that all 9 clock names must be
present, which might break compatibility with existing device trees that only
provide 6 clocks.

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260601-shikra-dispcc-gpucc-v3-0-61c1ba3735e8@oss.qualcomm.com?part=2