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 722A93EAC74 for ; Wed, 15 Jul 2026 09:03:12 +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=1784106199; cv=none; b=nUpu3ECbwRaDYIoS2oeTAf1gWMu95F5u7mbU57/npgNh5k84vJv+48eEDV/BUg/mcaVElQoyD7RGSoIznsBhJCHK+ersAYI3uv8c/rBpqN8Cc9FKC2hPq+oITsZoe6dMcaEojxHA9AoLHSXzbk5C971p3kTEJuSUTwWJe3qng1k= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1784106199; c=relaxed/simple; bh=X1XMTWVg3Zzw6NpTKuODTCrxrZ/CnigkcsSR1p77t3c=; h=From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Date: Message-Id; b=P6YpoGsEb1NUBuPZfAFM5pfN7s54dtRcuhcG5e66Be6NewMagXMzAaBRotwZkHLue62wBmKSkycVb8ZBQeZ0C/crclwnRDOfAiU2sPBGtco5IUoBd1J0HCXhDGi3cTiHgBPmkzYw2hoxoASi9QoEiENEHphszHevStgbWJK6a7Q= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=dne2sUAd; 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="dne2sUAd" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 26F5F1F000E9; Wed, 15 Jul 2026 09:03:10 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1784106190; bh=JWBQi35epvN8taOvpcmt7da362kMbsa+hjOixhsDKNc=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=dne2sUAdjIJr0EG/hufEaRbC3SIA7vzy3j36QthznSg17ed+9Be8ZY2AcvuGFMuGq FYxTwshvYPPMaDaAVJYmrPCnVd/bjMBCkS3g2G2FSsjnLFrlmE3VTXFtFI3TKGMtSs wRoWw4ppNYihNGMPckvSkkVz6LzMXrh2o7e3/1SuSzBn0A4UW02pwXNqQ02qyNcvNb juK+OyOs0WQ+XQLdkwc2IUnfrlXvGbN6Mz+jdtuu7sIuCML1f99yDp8X+v6Dcjwn8x 2mj1Z7sB2zFAPzb/JXjHt7BDbITnqdWC0hjjaAu3cjZ9Ne49MHPkzi3H82alqlnQuO 7SRhrBsfpgeTA== From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 01/16] device property: Add fwnode_graph_get_port_by_id() Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: "Chen-Yu Tsai" Cc: robh@kernel.org, conor+dt@kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20260715085348.3457359-2-wenst@chromium.org> References: <20260715085348.3457359-1-wenst@chromium.org> <20260715085348.3457359-2-wenst@chromium.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2026 09:03:09 +0000 Message-Id: <20260715090310.26F5F1F000E9@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: - [Low] The patch adds two conflicting declarations for `fwnode_graph_get_p= ort_by_id` in `include/linux/property.h`, which will break the build. -- --- Patch [1]: [PATCH v5 01/16] device property: Add fwnode_graph_get_port_= by_id() --- commit 88979df4c2fc6de15d7726e00adc783bff896bbd Author: Chen-Yu Tsai device property: Add fwnode_graph_get_port_by_id() This commit introduces a helper function to retrieve a reference to a port= =20 firmware node by its ID. It includes a flags parameter to allow callers to= =20 specify whether incomplete ports should be returned. [ ... ] > diff --git a/include/linux/property.h b/include/linux/property.h > index 14c304db46648..480ba8646bcc8 100644 > --- a/include/linux/property.h > +++ b/include/linux/property.h > @@ -505,6 +505,9 @@ int fwnode_get_phy_mode(const struct fwnode_handle *f= wnode); > =20 > void __iomem *fwnode_iomap(struct fwnode_handle *fwnode, int index); > =20 > +struct fwnode_handle *fwnode_graph_get_port_by_id(struct fwnode_handle *= fwnode, u32 id); > +struct fwnode_handle *fwnode_graph_get_port_by_id(struct fwnode_handle *= fwnode, u32 id, > + unsigned long flags); [Severity: Low] Does this cause a build failure? It looks like there are two conflicting=20 declarations for fwnode_graph_get_port_by_id() with different signatures.=20 Since C doesn't support function overloading, will this result in a=20 'conflicting types' compilation error when the header is included? > struct fwnode_handle *fwnode_graph_get_next_endpoint( > const struct fwnode_handle *fwnode, struct fwnode_handle *prev); > struct fwnode_handle * --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260715085348.3457= 359-1-wenst@chromium.org?part=3D1