Re: [PATCH 1/3] dt-bindings: power: Add MediaTek MT6858 power domain controller

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] The conditional block for 'mediatek,mt6858-power-controller' defines 6 items for 'access-controllers' but omits 'minItems: 6', allowing device trees with incomplete configurations to silently pass validation.
- [Medium] Increasing the global `maxItems` for `access-controllers` from 3 to 6 relaxes validation constraints for older compatible strings.
--

--- Patch [1]: [PATCH 1/3] dt-bindings: power: Add MediaTek MT6858 power domain controller ---
commit 45a85a0c0fa43cfb779c99ce538116e8c4ab742f
Author: Nikolai Burov <nikolai.burov@jolla.com>

dt-bindings: power: Add MediaTek MT6858 power domain controller

Add a new compatible and document bindings for the power domain
controller of the MT6858 SoC.

> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/mediatek,power-controller.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/mediatek,power-controller.yaml
> index 07f046277f8a6..eecb95323bfbe 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/mediatek,power-controller.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/mediatek,power-controller.yaml

[ ... ]

> @@ -55,7 +56,7 @@ properties:
>        faults while enabling or disabling a power domain.
>        For example, this may hold phandles to INFRACFG and SMI.
>      minItems: 1
> -    maxItems: 3
> +    maxItems: 6

[Severity: Medium]
Does increasing the global maxItems to 6 inadvertently relax the validation
constraints for older compatible strings (such as MT6735 or MT6795) that were
previously capped at 3? Should the tighter bounds be explicitly maintained for
those older platforms using an if-then block?

>  
>  patternProperties:
>    "^power-domain@[0-9a-f]+$":

[ ... ]

> @@ -155,6 +157,23 @@ required:
>    - compatible
>  
>  allOf:
> +  - if:
> +      properties:
> +        compatible:
> +          contains:
> +            enum:
> +              - mediatek,mt6858-power-controller
> +    then:
> +      properties:
> +        access-controllers:
> +          items:
> +            - description: handle to INFRACFG register block
> +            - description: handle to IMG_SUB0 register block
> +            - description: handle to CAM_SUB1 register block
> +            - description: handle to CAM_SUB0 register block
> +            - description: handle to IPE_SUB0 register block
> +            - description: handle to VLPCFG register block

[Severity: Medium]
Should there be a minItems: 6 constraint added to this block to enforce the
presence of all 6 items? Without it, would an incomplete MT6858 device tree
that provides fewer than 6 controllers silently pass validation?

> +
>    - if:
>        properties:
>          compatible:

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260714-mt6858-pmdomain-v1-0-4f09bbb822e0@jolla.com?part=1