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 F3D183B636A for ; Mon, 20 Jul 2026 07:48:47 +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=1784533729; cv=none; b=O1PeC06UjKHZ79JWdZN1W++5NZlcQrw4ejRcrluk+RRjxnOBI1o649qjR5MKctQ8bdPonIJPoGVoMtHsHGqpt9NR0+8fyIq7QHNlA38rYECMH6RQ1hX8EwaxZb/x2PMMMB27rY+bhqYN28auZJuCEKuKR/Y8/LtoPOgR3v52XE4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1784533729; c=relaxed/simple; bh=wKuABAW0HAWJJM4eFst7Pehk9Hw5ixl9MYcPvboCBrI=; h=From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Date: Message-Id; b=XagF3TWXollkEc9RMIjekxsDjJjWscZUGNHnQm1a++MV3bJ2LSKn42H03uJ9Dbyb3V51Qcrq7RiAhgx0J1AftmRJSDlX0Kpszpai9hLel3PUfYzQdt5nhtFhU21wytKCXh5uNAr5ZnH6FqdbXJcKo13pnA3XqJhB5C+uT8rrrr8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=eiF6Ys5y; 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="eiF6Ys5y" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 61FB81F000E9; Mon, 20 Jul 2026 07:48:47 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1784533727; bh=Jxk0L8eSm3pZpEeL0pqiXKcHVBt0FpS3yNYNA6IPYd8=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=eiF6Ys5yQyaCCna/+MfIzoe5qo11YUGEOrp4blyCrOTeQedPNqHGtoh443trFBprR raknA53EkPHPVwWHQ6UYblY95Q4IyoBguLZvE1RL3WBe7fec9xm1/s8cWiEcOaGkRU P/HolVcIFKKI29wpVcY9dzEdTktagLm1AY8WsTKHCGz5mZpHOa/XrB+fRc/hurcFII gE0DL7dXfdRL8mm2RNSsENOqMicHEoaHJP4gP/0kVB4u9iMy2EOngjz0N0WwhauBY8 k/OYdHnGxpPC2VsLwSciDska0PBJJhWVDk7xDwyP+755UKna9QtGtS7SvRKiEQluR3 4/kKH1WvCidnQ== From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] dt-bindings: firmware: add mbedtee,tee binding Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: "Xing Loong" Cc: robh@kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, conor+dt@kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20260720073558.799755-3-xing.xl.loong@gmail.com> References: <20260720073558.799755-1-xing.xl.loong@gmail.com> <20260720073558.799755-3-xing.xl.loong@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2026 07:48:46 +0000 Message-Id: <20260720074847.61FB81F000E9@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 2 potential issue(= s) to consider: - [Low] The YAML examples will fail `make dt_binding_check` with `dtc` comp= ilation errors due to unresolved phandle references. - [Low] Top-level `items` for `memory-region-names` is defined as an object= `enum` rather than a list, leading to unnecessary schema complexity and by= passing strict sequence expectations. -- --- Patch [2]: [PATCH v3 2/3] dt-bindings: firmware: add mbedtee,tee bindin= g --- commit 2b2356c421476302d4bae45809eeb06223db44ab Author: Xing Loong dt-bindings: firmware: add mbedtee,tee binding =20 This commit adds a new device tree binding for MbedTEE, a Trusted Execution Environment. It supports communication via shared memory ring buffers on ARM and RISC-V platforms. > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/mbedtee,tee.yaml = b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/mbedtee,tee.yaml > new file mode 100644 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/mbedtee,tee.yaml [ ... ] > + memory-region-names: > + minItems: 2 > + maxItems: 3 > + items: > + enum: > + - t2r-ring > + - t2r-shm > + - r2t-ring [Severity: Low] Does this top-level enum definition bypass the strict sequence expectations for *-names properties? Typically, items should be an ordered list of elements. Defining it as an e= num here allows the names to appear in any order, which is later overridden in = the allOf branches. Could this be simplified by defining the exact list of const elements at the top level? [ ... ] > +examples: > + - | > + #include > + > + firmware { > + mbedtee { > + compatible =3D "mbedtee,tee"; > + interrupts =3D ; > + memory-region =3D <&t2r_ring>, <&t2r_shm>; > + memory-region-names =3D "t2r-ring", "t2r-shm"; > + }; > + }; > + > + - | > + firmware { > + mbedtee { > + compatible =3D "mbedtee,tee"; > + msi-parent =3D <&imsic>; > + memory-region =3D <&t2r_ring>, <&t2r_shm>, <&r2t_ring>; > + memory-region-names =3D "t2r-ring", "t2r-shm", "r2t-ring"; > + }; > + }; [Severity: Low] Will these examples fail make dt_binding_check with dtc compilation errors? The phandles like <&t2r_ring>, <&t2r_shm>, <&r2t_ring>, and <&imsic> are us= ed here but are not defined as stub nodes anywhere in the example blocks. The device tree compiler generally cannot resolve these phandles without the st= ub definitions. --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260720073558.7997= 55-1-xing.xl.loong@gmail.com?part=3D2