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 9532840801C for ; Tue, 16 Jun 2026 07:31:20 +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=1781595081; cv=none; b=LzPHajLDKmAEbASBWToiGOkOkAUsAU3Ly7MsYDV0Wp5NdmA7UEnUCr6JPJ9+M3QahqXNbXrT2t7BfVqSeZPM3CzmwsJ/eGomCttu3NkjapAJFJ9kqKbg6sGb9KDvHZHVxDutEk6wI0kpx/phwACPA9B8rwZev8QcYgxQiEFmchA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1781595081; c=relaxed/simple; bh=MUvXesPFyZ2Y8sg0qQbkeioxs2j0YpJnqCRGVvvcNHk=; h=From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Date: Message-Id; b=mXmUH/+KwL7h5NEDxsWOCMSyVjr13MXHQrytYfUFlNwFFietIOgmhAV3cXjxWq6I+61ylzMnpu1JvMTupSbFHp88LGGtzPQUIfKvHGPbFiewNDaYOsN0LMtApfH6d8XEqU7fi45ByRSrIo8aXtuGiu3VX7Iacp8FEXifQ33vOpE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=ZttlWelk; 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="ZttlWelk" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0530A1F000E9; Tue, 16 Jun 2026 07:31:19 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1781595080; bh=Pb4xMFYA4+98XP5PXlkyTWl/J6Gi4mR7gtcLmsmTCIk=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=ZttlWelkbjumcE6zHN6KWMdddVzvpsrDnjCRr68YZ3ThqtJwoXq9CUWMdMvEawLNL Ln7WGWMWWWd3dz6/x6hGhO30ca2FQGiyuPPyz1xtRIyT2BqVpIHfDs8kv5cmVCMun7 hzQWDJJJDDssKRhAktsxMsQWqBdJZEGH0ht6woEu2TH7KcOX6StfTH5QctG4sDhSyj 8jLy2AqTcjRHlNulZqiv2A/EjYQZaBp+3TlWFnZFL2T5ezqjQLCXIdn+XvdvRtLAFD 8elJ/JKvzSMQHA7Mr/9M4u6K3J3QaYPq02kOCHW/Am620w8DgJaj/DTAtjNAXrvGmr xqdlBnZ458TYg== From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v5 1/6] dt-bindings: iio: add Open Sensor Fusion device Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: "Jinseob Kim" Cc: robh@kernel.org, conor+dt@kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20260616072242.3942-2-kimjinseob88@gmail.com> References: <20260616072242.3942-2-kimjinseob88@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2026 07:31:19 +0000 Message-Id: <20260616073120.0530A1F000E9@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: - [Medium] The binding uses a generic software protocol as the compatible s= tring instead of describing specific hardware. -- commit d9858298f5a88a8d0d1665f79878488487e06393 Author: Jinseob Kim dt-bindings: iio: add Open Sensor Fusion device Adds the generic Open Sensor Fusion device binding for a serdev-attached IIO sensor aggregation hub and documents the vendor prefix. > The opensensorfusion,osf compatible describes the generic Open Sensor > Fusion host interface. OSF GREEN is not the Linux compatible identity. > Likewise, OSF0 is the current wire magic and a wire-format detail, not > the Linux driver identity. [Severity: Medium] Does this approach align with Device Tree design principles? Device Tree is typically intended to describe specific hardware components (such as vendor,chip-model), rather than software interfaces or generic wire protocols. > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/opensensorfusion,osf.y= aml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/opensensorfusion,osf.yaml > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000000000..012a07fd69fe4 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/opensensorfusion,osf.yaml [ ... ] > +properties: > + compatible: > + const: opensensorfusion,osf > + > + vcc-supply: > + description: > + Regulator supplying power to the Open Sensor Fusion device. > + > +required: > + - compatible > + - vcc-supply [Severity: Medium] Is it appropriate to constrain the compatible string to a generic software protocol identifier here instead of a hardware-specific string? Because this generic compatible string also requires specific hardware constraints like vcc-supply, will future hardware variants that speak the same OSF protocol but have different electrical needs (such as needing a vddio-supply or reset GPIOs) be able to distinguish themselves without clashing with these generic constraints? --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260616072242.3942= -1-kimjinseob88@gmail.com?part=3D1