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 A13DD394792 for ; Mon, 3 Aug 2026 11:01:45 +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=1785754906; cv=none; b=ijAnJ6yKB+YDR1JoMp2gdeLLq82vHCF5HKe8cScS/2DpIVRVGLT6TL9BrpR0/mseRSNl+mvyuYvj9CoVe7wwtB4wlskCjxa6yXvQ0NAOx9JexZiEDZQoc3BeNbrqevcd+1qNv4sxXVzLXgMWNFI/ialp0EwV0ljgOAsAbZNhaPE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1785754906; c=relaxed/simple; bh=gzBuzTCllhR4Nhw50u8+Ls2sW4LKCji8tQhMRzEWK6c=; h=From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Date: Message-Id; b=sI7RnHvYZuRZ0XYV47eUHt663W3zuWtfDThylJFPoCgIJ3xEjvue+YIWfl+ijV9Nwo3kp9caGf9Fc3WKapFdjpsg07lWegFiLLHXas+QAMhrWZDMAmbOABfn4810xcIOxNjnhkNFXTRIaxf7cAX3oNh8zBMVChkJsmqHKg1Hjzg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=HNTUYxZs; 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="HNTUYxZs" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EFDD81F000E9; Mon, 3 Aug 2026 11:01:44 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1785754905; bh=Ne8j71Vx+5W6zGM8Vgo9W5dnldGOSG89s2WsMFj0gVY=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=HNTUYxZstlq5JyyCJ3lTNDH7WMpNA6kdTFjs/QmUcZKmklbPQKYIc4QjoRw1ZcTkD lpm5G93yylXbhhL1GCpTWP4jgyDx3Q8MF/Ub9lvzYd9ec0UB64EwR79BiQAMPBEIZy 0izeZ7vY4FETHnF94Y1ilb69oomdi9tZckP2dG7LAXRBp4+UiKGcMCBYilwpA+bV/F TgQBv0SG/YzlJvOc7W6gqjZKvJDhg0x3X/Oe+HTttjIpoGeJ37Cvsbv/MZEDnCav9y /3i749jADhNLbqN3sV5dezSvpewzCwYfmaeUuC6npO+079lc2s94WBwf9PJQjlZs0r tdnO2DJxsDDuA== From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v14 2/9] dt-bindings: remoteproc: qcom: document hexagon based WCSS secure PIL Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: "Varadarajan Narayanan" Cc: conor+dt@kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, robh@kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20260803-rproc-v14-2-a1f87b0b0ad2@oss.qualcomm.com> References: <20260803-rproc-v14-0-a1f87b0b0ad2@oss.qualcomm.com> <20260803-rproc-v14-2-a1f87b0b0ad2@oss.qualcomm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2026 11:01:44 +0000 Message-Id: <20260803110144.EFDD81F000E9@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: - [Medium] Incorrect placement of `minItems` and `maxItems` inside the `ite= ms` list for `qcom,smem-states`. - [Low] Copy-paste error in the description for `glink-edge` referencing th= e 'Modem'. -- --- Patch [2]: [PATCH v14 2/9] dt-bindings: remoteproc: qcom: document hexa= gon based WCSS secure PIL --- commit 8f051c37adcc2888cdf46122f432edbd580d36be Author: Manikanta Mylavarapu dt-bindings: remoteproc: qcom: document hexagon based WCSS secure PIL Add new binding document for hexagon based WCSS secure PIL remoteproc. IPQ5018, IPQ5332 and IPQ9574 follow secure PIL remoteproc. > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/qcom,ipq5018-wc= ss-sec-pil.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/qcom,ipq5018= -wcss-sec-pil.yaml > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000000000..1ec8df60d9633 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/qcom,ipq5018-wcss-sec-= pil.yaml [ ... ] > + mboxes: > + items: > + - description: TMECom mailbox > + > + qcom,smem-states: > + $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/phandle-array > + description: States used by the AP to signal the remote processor > + items: > + - minItems: 2 > + - maxItems: 2 [Severity: Medium] Is it intentional to place minItems and maxItems as elements inside the ite= ms array? By placing them inside the items array, the dt-schema validator treats them= as schemas for the individual elements of the phandle array (i.e. the first tu= ple is validated against {minItems: 2} and the second against {maxItems: 2}). If the intent is to restrict the length of the qcom,smem-states array itself to 2 items, should these be sibling properties to items rather than inside = it? > + > + qcom,smem-state-names: > + description: > + Names of the states used by the AP to signal the remote processor [ ... ] > + memory-region: > + items: > + - description: Q6 reserved region > + > + glink-edge: > + $ref: /schemas/remoteproc/qcom,glink-edge.yaml# > + description: > + Qualcomm G-Link subnode which represents communication edge, chann= els > + and devices related to the Modem. [Severity: Low] This isn't a bug, but should the description reference "WCSS" instead of "Modem"? Since this binding is for the Wireless Connectivity Subsystem, mentioning t= he Modem appears to be a leftover from a copy-paste of a modem remoteproc bind= ing. --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260803-rproc-v14-= 0-a1f87b0b0ad2@oss.qualcomm.com?part=3D2