Re: [PATCH v2] dt-bindings: pinctrl: ti,pinctrl-palmas: Convert to DT schema

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] Top-level `additionalProperties: false` incorrectly rejects properties from `$ref`.
- [Low] The dt-schema example fails to compile with dtc due to a missing node label referenced by a phandle.
--

--- Patch [1]: [PATCH v2] dt-bindings: pinctrl: ti,pinctrl-palmas: Convert to DT schema ---
commit c7d2f1369b4c397f6cd83791ed0ce6eb90fe3adf
Author: Bhargav Joshi <j.bhargav.u@gmail.com>

dt-bindings: pinctrl: ti,pinctrl-palmas: Convert to DT schema

Convert TI Palmas pin control text binding to DT schema. The legacy
binding allowed any subnode name. Restrict them to standard prefixes to
prevent the validator from accidentally evaluating standard integer
properties (like phandle) as child nodes.

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260822-ti-pinctrl-palmas-v1-1-a4d49e7f2dab@gmail.com

> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ti,palmas-pinctrl.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ti,palmas-pinctrl.yaml
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000000..c07e3a782ef07
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ti,palmas-pinctrl.yaml

[ ... ]

> +required:
> +  - compatible
> +
> +additionalProperties: false

[Severity: Medium]
Since this binding includes allOf: - $ref: pinctrl.yaml#, won't
additionalProperties: false incorrectly reject standard pinctrl properties?

Should this be unevaluatedProperties: false instead so that the schema
properly accounts for the inherited $ref properties?

> +
> +examples:
> +  - |
> +    pmic {
> +        pinctrl {
> +            compatible = "ti,tps65913-pinctrl";
> +            ti,palmas-enable-dvfs1;
> +            pinctrl-names = "default";
> +            pinctrl-0 = <&palmas_pins_state>;
> +
> +            pinmux {

[Severity: Low]
The phandle <&palmas_pins_state> is referenced here, but the corresponding
label palmas_pins_state: appears to have been omitted from the pinmux node
during the text-to-yaml conversion.

Will this cause the dt-schema example to fail compilation with dtc due to
the unresolvable phandle?

> +                gpio0 {
> +                    pins = "gpio0";
> +                    function = "id";
> +                    bias-pull-up;
> +                };

[ ... ]

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260822-ti-pinctrl-palmas-v2-1-501c9c670e4f@gmail.com?part=1