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 633DA339872 for ; Mon, 8 Jun 2026 02:51:06 +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=1780887067; cv=none; b=pIDFzHauRnF+WCgSsd/Y4q7Qpv3YVL24sRP6pHE9dP+YRI4MEhG4P3e/+CYT8fgF6iVw5suFn1kpX2Q3U0AkzCAbflg9yJajTtPnTGfqYjvo972/XyTnPmsgwcPjpC4mLuWBK8ao134gDHiDqEc1h9E5tdA3K7T+AvdUsPoF7Aw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1780887067; c=relaxed/simple; bh=+WTyU7SsSFBGbdcafbrDyG/8J4N4+jcATJOeU0I+Skc=; h=From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Date: Message-Id; b=NvQWjTCj4N2SDm/grahZFclck0DYV+Krs1y2c3mI+ZN8CTEN2+tW4lmxGJcq7cC+zeLCAwEYwfzW2OP2pe87QwGTueWpOcJJth2EjUkf4ww4ztuHrlWw9V5tBNFdlaaw5h65MIashtvz2ykyVodBl2exBBYbtxcb9eOXXZ8Ivew= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=Pm+GNI+t; 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="Pm+GNI+t" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BA9761F00893; Mon, 8 Jun 2026 02:51:05 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1780887066; bh=6ea7PXj6OU8kge9vWMJ2uS9AGPhSKcYWsd76cJ0Bd18=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=Pm+GNI+t4BTT6Yp/FFRoB7zSoK5zZ8HOwBr/fmTF9u6DrsBuKGGojidW0W0DacRS7 lzBlz86zn44ktk4iB8WIBM+TEAXUPlpCykjGUhtMnzNVuMmqP1xvsUsKb3TpO7sjAy d3WFVXu2bcDXKeEICBrlCtQfWY9ZA8caM8dW3DjCaJJ0xbmU8m60dvWZm8sU6CQiQM CB5ZqpRZ7yttOVHARMuKxHBUssWBYT6v4nva8r7tnfVo9mkQNqQTtI1zMKRSU+Ts6y sCgq0d4wH3UDtf3TmyZCmw3QC64LA3kIj9375JMhopeG0M9y621XLhhkCqDPGmi4eY KcMC92kqI5OKA== From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] ARM: dts: aspeed: ventura2: Add Meta ventura2 BMC Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: "Kyle Hsieh" Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, robh@kernel.org, conor+dt@kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20260608-ventura2_initial_dts-v5-2-37ee5bcf58b6@gmail.com> References: <20260608-ventura2_initial_dts-v5-2-37ee5bcf58b6@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2026 02:51:05 +0000 Message-Id: <20260608025105.BA9761F00893@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 3 potential issue(= s) to consider: - [High] `io_expander8` erroneously requests the same interrupt line (0) as= `io_expander0` on the `io_expander7` interrupt controller. - [Low] Unit addresses for DAC nodes in `&i2c6` contain leading zeros. - [Low] Unnecessary `#address-cells` and `#size-cells` properties in the `a= dc@48` node. -- commit d9f91d3abcec0ae2dcf56a7a83ec66a8e2eb98b9 Author: Kyle Hsieh ARM: dts: aspeed: ventura2: Add Meta ventura2 BMC Add linux device tree entry related to the Meta(Facebook) rmc-node. The system use an AT2600 BMC. This node is named "ventura2". > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed/aspeed-bmc-facebook-ventura2.dts b/= arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed/aspeed-bmc-facebook-ventura2.dts > new file mode 100644 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed/aspeed-bmc-facebook-ventura2.dts [ ... ] > +&i2c6 { > + status =3D "okay"; > + > + dac@0c { > + reg =3D <0x0c>; [Severity: Low] Does this leading zero in the unit address trigger device tree compiler warnings? Should these nodes be written as dac@c, dac@e, and dac@f instead? > + compatible =3D "adi,ad5612"; > + vcc-supply =3D <&p5v_dac_aux>; > + }; [ ... ] > + io_expander0: gpio@20 { > + compatible =3D "nxp,pca9555"; > + reg =3D <0x20>; > + gpio-controller; > + #gpio-cells =3D <2>; > + interrupt-parent =3D <&io_expander7>; > + interrupts =3D <0 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW>; [ ... ] > + io_expander8: gpio@24 { > + compatible =3D "nxp,pca9555"; > + reg =3D <0x24>; > + gpio-controller; > + #gpio-cells =3D <2>; > + interrupt-parent =3D <&io_expander7>; > + interrupts =3D <0 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW>; [Severity: High] Will this cause an interrupt conflict between io_expander8 and io_expander0? Both nodes appear to request interrupt index 0 on the io_expander7 parent, which might prevent the kernel from reliably demultiplexing the source of the interrupt. > + > + gpio-line-names =3D [ ... ] > + adc@48 { > + compatible =3D "ti,ads1015"; > + reg =3D <0x48>; > + #address-cells =3D <1>; > + #size-cells =3D <0>; [Severity: Low] Are these cell properties necessary here? Since there are no child nodes defined for this ADC, this will likely trigger a dtc warning about defining #address-cells without children. > + }; > + > + temp-sensor@4c { --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260608-ventura2_i= nitial_dts-v5-0-37ee5bcf58b6@gmail.com?part=3D2