Re: [PATCH 1/4] dt-bindings: cache: qcom,llcc: allow optional second interrupt for LCP/SRP ECC

[Faiyaz Mohammed <faiyaz.mohammed@oss.qualcomm.com>]

On 14-10-2026 21:35, sashiko-bot@kernel.org wrote:
> Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
> - [Low] dt-bindings: missing maxItems constraint for legacy interrupts
> --
> 
> commit 50febfa0c04f4bae15f676db2e6662c8855b0e3c
> Author: Faiyaz Mohammed <faiyaz.mohammed@oss.qualcomm.com>
> 
> dt-bindings: cache: qcom,llcc: allow optional second interrupt for LCP/SRP ECC
> 
> QCM2390 (Shikra) has an LCP/SRP block that signals DDR DRAM ECC errors
> on a dedicated interrupt line separate from the existing TRP/DRP cache
> ECC interrupt. This commit allows an optional second interrupt in the
> LLCC binding and enforces both are present for qcom,shikra-llcc.
> 
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cache/qcom,llcc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cache/qcom,llcc.yaml
>> index 2141e5d4de63b..3546cf7c25195 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cache/qcom,llcc.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cache/qcom,llcc.yaml
>> @@ -64,7 +64,17 @@ properties:
>>      maxItems: 18
>>  
>>    interrupts:
>> -    maxItems: 1
>> +    minItems: 1
>> +    items:
>> +      - description: TRP/DRP LLCC cache ECC (ddrss_apps_interrupt[2])
>> +      - description: LCP/SRP DDR DRAM ECC (ddrss_apps_interrupt[1]), present
>> +          on platforms with an LCP/SRP block such as QCM2390
> 
> [Severity: Low]
> Does this implicitly raise the maximum number of interrupts to 2 for all
> compatible strings?
> 
> Since maxItems: 1 was removed globally, a device tree for older hardware 
> could erroneously define two interrupts without failing schema validation.
> 
>> +
>> +  interrupt-names:
>> +    minItems: 1
>> +    items:
>> +      - const: llcc-ecc
>> +      - const: llcc-lcp-ecc
>>  
>>    memory-region:
>>      maxItems: 1
> 
> [ ... ]
> 
>> @@ -234,6 +244,20 @@ allOf:
>>              - const: llcc1_base
>>              - const: llcc_broadcast_base
>>  
>> +  - if:
>> +      properties:
>> +        compatible:
>> +          contains:
>> +            const: qcom,shikra-llcc
>> +    then:
>> +      properties:
>> +        interrupts:
>> +          minItems: 2
>> +        interrupt-names:
>> +          minItems: 2
>> +      required:
>> +        - interrupt-names
>> +
> 
> [Severity: Low]
> Should there be an else clause here to restrict legacy platforms back to
> maxItems: 1 for interrupts and interrupt-names?
> 
Valid finding — without an else clause a non-Shikra platform can declare
two interrupts without failing schema validation. Fixed in v2 by adding
an else branch to the allOf block:

  else:
    properties:
      interrupts:
        maxItems: 1
      interrupt-names:
        maxItems: 1

platforms except qcom,shikra-llcc, which requires both.
This restores the original single-interrupt constraint for all

Thanks & regards,
Mohammed Faiyaz