Re: [PATCH v5 06/25] dt-bindings: clock: mediatek: regroup MT8192 dt-bindings into MT8186

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] The `allOf` conditional block in `mediatek,mt8186-clock.yaml` incorrectly uses `enum` directly on the `compatible` property instead of `contains: enum:`, breaking device tree schema validation for MT8188 hardware variants.
--

--- Patch [6]: [PATCH v5 06/25] dt-bindings: clock: mediatek: regroup MT8192 dt-bindings into MT8186 ---
commit 06947e98086d9925a384efecc6b70a1f4b24045a
Author: Louis-Alexis Eyraud <louisalexis.eyraud@collabora.com>

    dt-bindings: clock: mediatek: regroup MT8192 dt-bindings into MT8186

This commit regroups the MT8192 functional and system clock bindings into
the MT8186 binding files. It consolidates similar clock controller designs
to ease maintainability.

> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/mediatek,mt8186-clock.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/mediatek,mt8186-clock.yaml
> index 0bc2da60a6016..b5988d122e4dd 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/mediatek,mt8186-clock.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/mediatek,mt8186-clock.yaml
> @@ -58,6 +58,26 @@ properties:
>            - mediatek,mt8188-vencsys
>            - mediatek,mt8188-wpesys
>            - mediatek,mt8188-wpesys-vpp0
> +          - mediatek,mt8192-camsys
> +          - mediatek,mt8192-camsys_rawa
[ ... ]
> +          - mediatek,mt8192-vdecsys_soc
> +          - mediatek,mt8192-vdecsys
> +          - mediatek,mt8192-vencsys
>  
>    reg:
>      maxItems: 1

[Severity: Medium]
Does this file's allOf block incorrectly evaluate the compatible strings?

Looking further down in the same file:

Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/mediatek,mt8186-clock.yaml:allOf:
  allOf:
    - if:
        properties:
          compatible:
            enum:
              - mediatek,mt8188-camsys-rawa

Because the compatible property is evaluated as an array in Device Tree schemas,
does using enum directly instead of contains: enum: cause the if condition
to always evaluate to false?

If it fails to match the array, it appears validation falls through to the
else block, incorrectly enforcing '#reset-cells': false for MT8188 device nodes
that actually require resets.

Should this use contains: enum: instead to properly validate the hardware
variants?

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260801-mt8189-clocks-system-base-v5-0-ac4410697cc2@collabora.com?part=6