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 7363B42046F for ; Wed, 23 Sep 2026 20:17:10 +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=1790194632; cv=none; b=EG38nMhx7dw+ozGwSAidDAbgE+F5Pb5cuK/0EgJE0A/y/wJ8+ERWo7Zc7eyL9jGpL26h0avSeLMA/Thq58iLLg7SKykGeWwF1OBJ79nl/zQtGY3Kw9ABQxL3QUJBdYDSkvEt8sA9ArUSee+3cApemKaiNVJA0tf3j+6uMr+AamU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790194632; c=relaxed/simple; bh=9FJ0ACN8NtSIO45XhBBwxYi3C9hdtYzpE3fHDtHaKk8=; h=From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Date: Message-Id; b=dGDuBAzyfEIzn6/Rts34B3CKy1DqeEivEvSUKZlaOJxjXBPoiGMtfyN2oAOwwvA7fhBkNYGzcyX7sTPr3ts7UkDYNep8nJiv6rOOc/JITtvI6hvjfJ7e3MipTmK2alsXdeMMhMSnGwQqGIVwSeL7Q948+H01JjMnSJmsTbrMycE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=G8BZJWXH; 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="G8BZJWXH" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E6A6A1F00893; Wed, 23 Sep 2026 20:17:07 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1790194628; bh=yAjqfAW5bufm+AVogJB9WGLnr3zM55n/7TxWBu55cXw=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=G8BZJWXH/AeQQt/z6NE8wb4XMPVGdgWGdjJmhBDRva83xstzQVZuBsx0/gKuo9unM 6PeI74aIai+EKLZF7xFbBUPALi/nv4W26DYp9zzxmiJAWVGesXKjhLRZYLsyNrc2HH jzz3+3vyVfnMdetDuszTdk0s2/4Fs0lj59hTKDYUzClNatqSIepaOUthBMorXz8bpE 8xRzoXo4CfhBuksctE5rJZpkfpqYL5zP3HLLLG1uW5XmFsLdZJ2k5HLvze/ChdrahN vnqDLEhB8c9XHF6uXGFqi6jXV2acxZMhrIbZjqr3sho3Ni9BJVvbYv+qbiwzq/fPh7 h+EymL7t5NJdw== From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/7] dt-bindings: display: allow the boot logo in a reserved memory region Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: "Max Pedraza" Cc: conor+dt@kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, robh@kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org In-Reply-To: <20260923201035.51007-6-maximpedraza@gmail.com> References: <20260923201035.51007-1-maximpedraza@gmail.com> <20260923201035.51007-6-maximpedraza@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2026 20:17:07 +0000 Message-Id: <20260923201707.E6A6A1F00893@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 1 potential issue(= s) to consider: - [Low] dt-bindings: oneOf allows partial image properties with memory-regi= on -- commit 9a7a18d6778dd2101e7f626e61f0b37dcf103451 Author: Max Pedraza Subject: dt-bindings: display: allow the boot logo in a reserved memory reg= ion This commit allows the boot logo to be specified via a reserved memory region instead of inline properties, enabling the image to be shared across multiple device trees. It introduces a oneOf constraint intended to make the two methods mutually exclusive. > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/boot-logo-clut224.= yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/boot-logo-clut224.yaml > index 9dc34717639e9..a71fc09a7c071 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/boot-logo-clut224.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/boot-logo-clut224.yaml [ ... ] > @@ -103,10 +122,17 @@ properties: > =20 > required: > - compatible > - - width > - - height > - - clut > - - data > + > +# The image either lives in the device tree or in a reserved memory regi= on, > +# never both. > +oneOf: > + - required: > + - width > + - height > + - clut > + - data > + - required: > + - memory-region [Severity: Low] Does this schema validation fully enforce the intended mutual exclusivity if partial image properties are provided? If a device tree includes memory-region alongside just a few of the image properties (for example, accidentally including width and height but not cl= ut), the first branch of the oneOf evaluates to false. The second branch evaluat= es to true.=20 Since exactly one branch is true, the overall oneOf constraint succeeds. Th= is allows invalid device trees with overlapping configurations to silently pass dt_binding_check. Should the schema explicitly disallow the other properties when memory-regi= on is present to prevent this? --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260923201035.5100= 7-1-maximpedraza@gmail.com?part=3D5