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 2240D581221; Wed, 9 Sep 2026 14:23:55 +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=1788963837; cv=none; b=VcsGFXh0l4snudy3FxsAL7I9uu9zUmRBDWDc1sfKPcd/9L5uynCMixlw/+9GFZty/zlW/jAeYxqoAe0wR4KENLujn8Aw2EOUr8UEK106WswGCbF5u/Y6GkP+Qsd23RW+147Ch1973pJiDj0SeaMvi34Rd750rdCD6pFGLlrRa3g= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788963837; c=relaxed/simple; bh=4fKzO26/DXaoFcqRpKkVT4WzcAtUofxQPMhPWJLPH28=; h=From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Date: Message-Id; b=cdPavF+kHQFhvhoF2MYqu+qIflIYdLPBQMII57pOmumOeuAXr7Oao9qB3s7QVjBkulHNiLFepBZYuRErQY/dbk5a+LYRhdLOvj3Uc2DNNs21tEKbR4dcFR62fyiYlI10Bjo1Yjc5smPtb8yV+Uul4OxL7vBaEYfiQLTc7DoQ+UA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=mzVnvyIH; 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="mzVnvyIH" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 73A7B1F00A3D; Wed, 9 Sep 2026 14:23:55 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1788963835; bh=EwEJ+GRjqxejQfZU0Yavr7Ed90Mmv8ee9kgNW4K6QuE=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=mzVnvyIHim8yZzeRzjrax1IdyyFShOZio5ztGc7X+9e3xOldNzHV5BOnNFT9IahiR T+bkYqv/9o6ShdKFSSz8VhFBe1CYaVGpjGQDMoKYDnXX6ddBTEM7hYpj+SJyRWoEfu 3E3ImNYpY7Rxu7e6lOM6dZHmtQ8QUAJMZCceRC/J+rPD+Ra78EjtY86QX9TP/ivx87 CJf1NyEhRu/FxYhkfQsXWUShqiYrz0plfOXjaaIgnTNwCGHQoUTmtK//atUG42L6yC smDugRXyqf3b7LkEEc3ejcpn/RY3O2VllgCxMfVTCT8+5LuK3qw5/gWzRebYKRCZoo bbstVPCATVwlA== From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] dt-bindings: rtc: Add Raspberry Pi 5 RTC binding Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: "Sander Speetjens" Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, "Alexandre Belloni" , robh@kernel.org, linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org, conor+dt@kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20260909141300.1368790-2-sander.speetjens@gmail.com> References: <20260909141300.1368790-1-sander.speetjens@gmail.com> <20260909141300.1368790-2-sander.speetjens@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2026 14:23:55 +0000 Message-Id: <20260909142355.73A7B1F00A3D@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 3 potential issue(= s) to consider: - [Medium] The binding introduces a custom, un-prefixed `trickle-charge-mic= rovolt` property instead of using the standard `trickle-voltage-millivolt` = property, and fails to reference the common RTC schema. - [Low] The YAML filename does not match the primary compatible string it d= efines. - [Low] Spelling errors in the commit message. -- commit 425dd29b0a89a2c3ccab5825c325cf7042fb52e4 Author: Sander Speetjens dt-bindings: rtc: Add Raspberry Pi 5 RTC binding This commit adds device tree bindings for the Raspberry Pi 5 RTC, which is located in a custom DA9091 PMIC and accessed through the firmware mailbox interface. > Add device tree bindings for the Raspberry Pi 5 RTC. > Located in a custom DA9091 PMIC and accesed trough the firmware mailbox. [Severity: Low] This isn't a bug, but there are spelling mistakes in the commit message. "accesed trough" should be "accessed through". > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/raspberrypi,rtc-rpi.ya= ml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/raspberrypi,rtc-rpi.yaml > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000000000..93430048355a8 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/raspberrypi,rtc-rpi.yaml > @@ -0,0 +1,48 @@ [ ... ] > +properties: > + compatible: > + const: raspberrypi,rpi-rtc [Severity: Low] Does this compatible string intentionally differ from the filename? The YAML filename (raspberrypi,rtc-rpi.yaml) does not match the defined primary compatible string (raspberrypi,rpi-rtc), which goes against standard binding naming conventions. > + > + firmware: > + $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/phandle > + description: > + Phandle to the Raspberry Pi firmware device. > + > + trickle-charge-microvolt: > + description: > + RTC backup battery trickle-charge voltage. A value of 0 disables > + trickle charging. [Severity: Medium] Should this property use the standard trickle-voltage-millivolt property name instead? If a custom property is strictly required here, shouldn't it have a vendor prefix? [ ... ] > +required: > + - compatible > + - firmware > + > +additionalProperties: false [Severity: Medium] Should this binding reference the common RTC schema? Setting additionalProperties: false without including an $ref to rtc.yaml# will strictly reject generic RTC properties. Any device tree developer attempting to use standard RTC properties (like wakeup-source) on this node will encounter schema validation failures. --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260909141300.1368= 790-1-sander.speetjens@gmail.com?part=3D1