Re: [PATCH v2] dt-bindings: vendor-prefixes: Add Xuantie Semiconductor

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Low] Introduces a duplicate and unused vendor prefix (`xuantie`) for a vendor that already uses the established `thead` prefix.
--

--- Patch [1]: [PATCH v2] dt-bindings: vendor-prefixes: Add Xuantie Semiconductor ---
commit 9230660a7e40e4df99ae36ef91b16bfb20d60e44
Author: GUO Ren (XuanTie) <guoren@kernel.org>

dt-bindings: vendor-prefixes: Add Xuantie Semiconductor

This commit adds xuantie as a new vendor prefix for Shanghai Xuantie
Semiconductor Technology Co., Ltd. in the devicetree bindings.

> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml
[ ... ]
> @@ -1905,6 +1905,8 @@ patternProperties:
>      description: Xilinx
>    "^xnano,.*":
>      description: Xnano
> +  "^xuantie,.*":
> +    description: Shanghai Xuantie Semiconductor Technology Co., Ltd.

[Severity: Low]
Is this vendor prefix redundant given the established thead prefix?

The kernel already relies heavily on the thead prefix for T-Head/XuanTie
processor IPs (like thead,c906, thead,th1520, and thead,c920). Adding
multiple vendor prefixes for the same company fragments the devicetree
namespace.

Also, since the actual compatible strings using this prefix were removed
in V2 (as noted in the changelog), the xuantie prefix is currently completely
unused. Would it be better to drop this patch entirely and continue using
the established thead prefix?

>    "^xunlong,.*":
>      description: Shenzhen Xunlong Software CO.,Limited
>    "^xylon,.*":

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260817-xt_vendor_v2-v2-1-8d4eed65a533@kernel.org?part=1