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 E83014746AE for ; Fri, 2 Oct 2026 09:14:02 +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=1790932444; cv=none; b=pTdrN2Q7EZCEYzZh0yEX9uq/B1tAsiekz1zu27xVv2x4eFaL9wzLH6yjaJMBzYC26Qsvx2uaoa17AdiHqBq876tOTFBSH3GnWRPVJyyIo7/XRuG0i0c1tbyw8zSZBQwvKfj8Vyl74OGE5mUDcRWq0d20CvAPoj26HjFXW7sdqfM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790932444; c=relaxed/simple; bh=rnfQLvdqZKWir31ricde3mjE6DL7vWz7DoCRHdhcOEk=; h=From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Date: Message-Id; b=cJ+HUI/iPRbRdgtJf3Su4xrOV6oAtq/YmGh+VBCkgtHdvAhOIyZR1ccoZv4J8QGNfV3uwbqMSTFSdJ8lfgQhpanvEuWtk9Imfrjp9ldqfD41fYqvtbgtumjrjWq6wMfeC0xdnlk+/kL5afHiWQZY5wpt8RjRv5mNgK4yogeAHgo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=hdQiW4vZ; 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="hdQiW4vZ" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 878431F0089A; Fri, 2 Oct 2026 09:14:02 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1790932442; bh=P1QzvxoszUfGHcuOYFVkiCngzYZlzTYSKDsIEPwRd4w=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=hdQiW4vZ66oepzHTDInI0/3yBrC3QUrHbr4+N3C9t72YINwMAgTCv/Pzrfc8Kfa9C ZARzlxQ8xmeL0yyP1xxbuF5ZoNI2TUqgcdOIgfyvHI1QPq0+EkG2g2x59S+ul19kC7 8tX8f67oSUsHZVsrH3LdKM+E+b3fbwzEpxU0L+xn4QSrKSghfGmqg5SvhVMyN7vUtM chZk2OeEY5J0BxmxSxnbMyyCUBuJPsxM8iUgQHEbt6oNkvyOUuJxJbwAjuyPtM9uaM lD9pOtg1U+4zOUK5m0j+tJ0EE+aKiRP/uXsAxAMl/Q2dqgYXE5nQ3uEGJWAm6Ga50p div/lMdj0dfPw== From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/7] dt-bindings: power: qcom-rpmpd: define RPMPD_VDDMD Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: =?utf-8?b?QmFybmFiw6FzIEN6w6ltw6Fu?= Cc: conor+dt@kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, robh@kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20261002-sdm632-rpmpd-v3-1-95c47d0f26cf@mainlining.org> References: <20261002-sdm632-rpmpd-v3-0-95c47d0f26cf@mainlining.org> <20261002-sdm632-rpmpd-v3-1-95c47d0f26cf@mainlining.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2026 09:14:02 +0000 Message-Id: <20261002091402.878431F0089A@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: - [High] dt-bindings: RPMPD_VDDMD incorrectly shares index 5 with RPMPD_VDD= MX_VFL -- commit 12f0f9a3ab8aa298b418ea38da861f57dfeb42fb Author: Barnab=C3=A1s Cz=C3=A9m=C3=A1n dt-bindings: power: qcom-rpmpd: define RPMPD_VDDMD This commit adds a new generic power domain index, RPMPD_VDDMD, intended for use with SDM439 and SDM632 MSS. > diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h b/include/dt-bindings= /power/qcom-rpmpd.h > index 4371ac941f29d..beb066b3aa8c6 100644 > --- a/include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h > +++ b/include/dt-bindings/power/qcom-rpmpd.h > @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ > #define RPMPD_VDDMX 3 > #define RPMPD_VDDMX_AO 4 > #define RPMPD_VDDMX_VFL 5 > +#define RPMPD_VDDMD 5 [Severity: High] Will this duplicate index cause a conflict for platforms that require both the Modem Power Domain (RPMPD_VDDMD) and the Memory Voltage Floor Domain (RPMPD_VDDMX_VFL)? These values map directly to designated array initializers in the provider driver (drivers/pmdomain/qcom/rpmpd.c). If a platform descriptor array includes both, the duplicate index 5 could cause the compiler to silently overwrite one of the array elements, rendering that domain unusable at runtime. Would it be possible to assign a globally unique ID (such as the next available index) to prevent overlap? > #define RPMPD_SSCCX 6 > #define RPMPD_SSCCX_VFL 7 > #define RPMPD_SSCMX 8 --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261002-sdm632-rpm= pd-v3-0-95c47d0f26cf@mainlining.org?part=3D1