Re: [PATCH v3 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] Relaxing the global maxItems for access-controllers weakens validation for older SoCs, and the MT6858 block lacks min/max constraints.
- [Medium] The parent SCPSYS compatible string for MT6858 is undocumented in the related MFD binding.
--

--- Patch [1]: [PATCH v3 1/3] dt-bindings: power: Add MediaTek MT6858 power domain controller ---
commit 2af17e3001f2b4860c3cbd850866a2a03694b597
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 070c6e5666dc0..d03e4a9251635 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/mediatek,power-controller.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/mediatek,power-controller.yaml
> @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@ properties:
>      enum:
>        - mediatek,mt6735-power-controller
>        - mediatek,mt6795-power-controller
> +      - mediatek,mt6858-power-controller

[Severity: Medium]
Since this power controller is a child of the SCPSYS system controller,
shouldn't the corresponding parent compatible string (e.g.
mediatek,mt6858-scpsys) be added to the parent MFD binding as well?

Without it, a complete Device Tree declaring the MT6858 SCPSYS parent node
might fail schema validation when checked against
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/mediatek,mt8195-scpsys.yaml.

[ ... ]

> @@ -56,7 +57,7 @@ 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 relaxing the global maxItems constraint unintentionally weaken schema
validation for older hardware generations?

Previous SoCs relied on this global maxItems: 3 because they lack their own
specific if-then blocks for access-controllers. Now they will be permitted to
have up to 6 without triggering a validation error.

[ ... ]

> @@ -156,6 +158,23 @@ 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]
Does this block also need explicit minItems: 6 and maxItems: 6 constraints?

Without them, JSON schema will fall back to the global minItems: 1, allowing
incomplete MT6858 device tree nodes specifying fewer than 6 access controllers
to bypass strict validation.

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

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260720-mt6858-pmdomain-v3-0-8966d8de93c8@jolla.com?part=1