Re: [PATCH v13 02/22] dt-bindings: media: i2c: max96717: add support for I2C ATR

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] The `i2c-atr` node and its child nodes omit mandatory properties from their `required` lists and lack appropriate array constraints in the device tree bindings.
--

commit 92e28a019c543a99bd1f06cdc7c8d1709ad721cf
Author: Cosmin Tanislav <demonsingur@gmail.com>

dt-bindings: media: i2c: max96717: add support for I2C ATR

This commit adds support for I2C Address Translation (ATR) to the MAX96717
bindings, maintaining I2C gate support for compatibility.

> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/i2c/maxim,max96717.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/i2c/maxim,max96717.yaml
> index d1e8ba6e368ec..976f6dd2c164c 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/i2c/maxim,max96717.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/media/i2c/maxim,max96717.yaml
> @@ -91,6 +91,30 @@ properties:
>        incoming GMSL2 link. Therefore, it supports an i2c-gate
>        subnode to configure a sensor.
>  
> +  i2c-alias-pool:
> +    maxItems: 2
> +
> +  i2c-atr:
> +    type: object
> +    additionalProperties: false
> +
> +    properties:
> +      '#address-cells':
> +        const: 1
> +
> +      '#size-cells':
> +        const: 0
> +

[Severity: Medium]
Since the i2c-atr node acts as a bus container for child nodes with unit
addresses, should #address-cells and #size-cells be included in a required
list here to ensure they are always present?

> +    patternProperties:
> +      '^i2c@[01]$':
> +        $ref: /schemas/i2c/i2c-controller.yaml#
> +        unevaluatedProperties: false
> +        properties:
> +          reg:
> +            items:
> +              minimum: 0
> +              maximum: 1

[Severity: Medium]
The child nodes define a reg property for their unit addresses, but they do
not specify it as mandatory.

Should there be a required list containing reg for the ^i2c@[01]$ nodes to
prevent them from silently passing validation without a unit address?

Additionally, the reg property applies items constraints but lacks a maxItems
limit. 

Could this technically allow malformed arrays with multiple valid items 
(like reg = <0 1>) to pass schema validation?

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260604-gmsl2-3_serdes-v13-0-9d8a4919983b@analog.com?part=2