Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] dt-bindings: pinctrl: qcom,sm8450-tlmm: Add compatible for SM8475

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] The binding unconditionally applies SM8450-specific pin and function constraints to the SM8475 compatible string.
--

--- Patch [3]: [PATCH v2 3/4] dt-bindings: pinctrl: qcom,sm8450-tlmm: Add compatible for SM8475 ---
commit 2182c26c092a1652eaae869b76b2b59cec9ca7fc
Author: Esteban Urrutia <esteuwu@proton.me>

dt-bindings: pinctrl: qcom,sm8450-tlmm: Add compatible for SM8475

SM8450 and SM8475 have different pinctrl drivers, which are incompatible
with each other. Add compatible string for the SM8475 pinctrl driver.

> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/qcom,sm8450-tlmm.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/qcom,sm8450-tlmm.yaml
> index 16fd2c5e23393..c790ab851bc73 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/qcom,sm8450-tlmm.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/qcom,sm8450-tlmm.yaml
> @@ -17,7 +17,9 @@ allOf:
>  
>  properties:
>    compatible:
> -    const: qcom,sm8450-tlmm
> +    enum:
> +      - qcom,sm8450-tlmm
> +      - qcom,sm8475-tlmm

[Severity: Medium]
Since the commit message notes these drivers are incompatible with each other,
will SM8475 have different pin counts and multiplexing functions?

By adding the SM8475 compatible string here without any conditional blocks,
the schema unconditionally applies the SM8450-specific constraints defined
in qcom-sm8450-tlmm-state:

  qcom-sm8450-tlmm-state:
    type: object
    ...
    properties:
      pins:
        ...
      function:
        description:
          Specify the alternative function to be configured...
        enum: [ aon_cam, atest_char, atest_usb, ... ]

Will this cause dtbs_check to incorrectly reject valid SM8475 device trees
that use different pins or functions, and incorrectly allow SM8450 functions
on SM8475 nodes?

Should these constraints be split using if-then blocks, or is it better to
split this binding into a separate schema document for the SM8475 variant?

>  
>    reg:
>      maxItems: 1

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260802-sm8475-tlmm-v2-0-a93e1d1cb53b@proton.me?part=3