Re: [PATCH v11 13/19] dt-bindings: dma: ti: Add K3 BCDMA V2

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] dt-bindings: dma: ti: missing power-domains property in AM62L BCDMA schema
--

commit 9c4ddac8074788bfceb8a94493e2349001561825
Author: Sai Sree Kartheek Adivi <s-adivi@ti.com>

dt-bindings: dma: ti: Add K3 BCDMA V2

New binding document for Texas Instruments K3 Block Copy DMA (BCDMA) V2.
BCDMA V2 is introduced as part of AM62L.

> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/ti/ti,am62l-dmss-bcdma.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/ti/ti,am62l-dmss-bcdma.yaml
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000000..76184485ebcba
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/ti/ti,am62l-dmss-bcdma.yaml

[ ... ]

> +required:
> +  - compatible
> +  - reg
> +  - reg-names
> +  - "#dma-cells"
> +  - interrupts
> +  - interrupt-names
> +
> +unevaluatedProperties: false

[Severity: Medium]
Looking at Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/ti/ti,am62l-dmss-bcdma.yaml
at line 91, since the K3 AM62L architecture utilizes ARM SCMI for device
power management, does this strict evaluation constraint cause device tree
schema validation (make dtbs_check) to fail?

The BCDMA device node will need to explicitly declare a 'power-domains'
property to be powered on. Because neither this schema nor its referenced base
schema (dma-controller.yaml) define 'power-domains', the dtbs_check tooling
will reject the architecturally required property as unevaluated. Should
'power-domains' be defined in the properties before setting this to false?

> +
> +examples:
> +  - |

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261001084105.1692228-1-s-adivi@ti.com?part=13