Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] dt-bindings: i2c: Add Qualcomm I2C target controller

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] The I2C target controller binding prevents instantiation of I2C slave backend child nodes by using `additionalProperties: false` and omitting `#address-cells`, `#size-cells`, and a reference to `i2c-controller.yaml`.
--

--- Patch [1]: [PATCH v3 1/2] dt-bindings: i2c: Add Qualcomm I2C target controller ---
commit 554673beb1cac58de736368fdfcb491254cb8342
Author: Viken Dadhaniya <viken.dadhaniya@oss.qualcomm.com>

dt-bindings: i2c: Add Qualcomm I2C target controller

This commit adds a device tree binding for the dedicated I2C target
controller found on QDU1000 and related Qualcomm SoCs. It documents the
MMIO region, interrupts, clocks, interconnects, and pinctrl states.

> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/qcom,qdu1000-i2c-target.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/qcom,qdu1000-i2c-target.yaml
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000000..9a6b08f0ab0e7
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/qcom,qdu1000-i2c-target.yaml

[ ... ]

> +required:
> +  - compatible
> +  - reg
> +  - interrupts
> +  - clocks
> +  - clock-names
> +  - interconnects
> +
> +additionalProperties: false

[Severity: Medium]
Does this strict additionalProperties: false prevent the instantiation of
I2C slave backend child nodes?

Because this rejects properties like #address-cells and #size-cells, any
device tree that defines I2C target clients (such as slave-24c02) as
child nodes to this controller will fail schema validation.

Should this schema reference i2c-controller.yaml and use
unevaluatedProperties: false instead to allow standard I2C slave backend
instantiation?

> +
> +examples:
> +  - |
> +    #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/arm-gic.h>

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260813-i2c-qcom-slave-v3-0-1d3742e2ad47@oss.qualcomm.com?part=1