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 E7BEB480321 for ; Fri, 2 Oct 2026 09:14:32 +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=1790932474; cv=none; b=D5APWPr2hsLy7LCVqDq2P1rvgUuIUKo5gciKSWJEBvC0kJkTmBTSQfVzi4YEjLh4OeKg1G6fEQMLeWv5pabMo6CMDrvf0mFpfEBF+DVPPggR4lXPItOXTT0D50+QSrjvL8AVOFq70FAgoJWbUePZcy0xdvhLTv7JFlL7VZhX2Yc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790932474; c=relaxed/simple; bh=mQGEE5uoW5muh2aeWyrIJCtNORRMtrVhHqhZPU4ZbQ8=; h=From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Date: Message-Id; b=QwFV1UKyg97DgBRK8rHXex3o9veMmJ9jl1JhIc/awkSFyEuhb5dL+pb9ngXmkHXQEe3lqv0a4Y7stBr5wR2i+CdFJog7+o+UZOn79FoYguIEwUd32Vd/iE1F52nOloSTC3c4Wpfhu6ogHhfO2Psx316MZqoGGdaWN2Sxq+ffZW0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=l8n8wKw4; 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="l8n8wKw4" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8FF8C1F00899; Fri, 2 Oct 2026 09:14:32 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1790932472; bh=OSBoHocnBC7myWVejLPUwgE7NV/ossFNA54QDtemtQo=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=l8n8wKw4597q1TjsaQ7qmyaHEywChrZy5/v5KTHHZrisnptTt7UHdJ6Zvz9eoY2+a C0Z/a5FSXyNqjjEl8XDsrLkFEi74q0KaSDtowot6T8gdo/5RARH/S0AcT+YTjISjlE VLtVv1Y22Lg9jEisjCI+FeohdOxCW39LUIH1aRT9K87xI/EYlaJ6PqMKkcZBFoBEkI +6QiBFibS2abRkcQLzOJGycujEvH0mECfISOpNtCuzrYyxwEv3JMxwRfvG0A60uY2t sPm05KeFpd3iNuU8E9OzDck/BK3ADewC7cvx6CQGnATqXoGMx4eolu4jVJYNL142v7 dEdfKDW5bNt1w== From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: arm: keystone: ti,sci: Correct reg and mboxes constraints Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: "Krzysztof Kozlowski" Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, robh@kernel.org, conor+dt@kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20261002063011.38972-2-krzysztof.kozlowski@oss.qualcomm.com> References: <20261002063011.38972-2-krzysztof.kozlowski@oss.qualcomm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2026 09:14:32 +0000 Message-Id: <20261002091432.8FF8C1F00899@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: - [Medium] dt-bindings: missing minItems allows incomplete mboxes array -- commit 344119f20b7b40eacf80223cff1d1579d7303039 Author: Krzysztof Kozlowski dt-bindings: arm: keystone: ti,sci: Correct reg and mboxes constraints This commit replaces minItems constraints with maxItems constraints for the reg and mboxes properties. It intends to enforce an upper bound on these lists while assuming the lower bound remains intact. > minItems does not impose any limit on actual maximum number of items = in > a list, thus it needs maxItems. maxItems on the other hand does imply > minItems. Add missing upper bound on 'reg' and 'mboxes'. [Severity: Medium] Is the statement that maxItems implies minItems accurate for values greater than 1? In JSON Schema and dt-schema, omitting minItems on an array defaults to minItems: 1, regardless of the maxItems value. > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/keystone/ti,sci.yaml b= /Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/keystone/ti,sci.yaml > index 25a2b42105e54..052e23966a8f1 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/keystone/ti,sci.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/keystone/ti,sci.yaml [ ... ] > @@ -59,7 +59,7 @@ properties: > - const: tx > =20 > mboxes: > - minItems: 2 > + maxItems: 2 [Severity: Medium] Does removing minItems: 2 here incorrectly allow partial configurations? A device tree providing only a single mailbox will pass schema validation since the default minItems is 1, even though exactly two mailboxes (rx and tx) are required by the hardware and the mbox-names constraint. --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261002063011.3897= 2-2-krzysztof.kozlowski@oss.qualcomm.com?part=3D1