Re: [PATCH v3 03/11] dtc: dt-check-style: Handle root node in overlays

[Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@oss.qualcomm.com>]

On 03/08/2026 11:18, sashiko-bot@kernel.org wrote:
> Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
> - [Medium] The patch fails to address the issue claimed in the commit message, introduces dead logic for overlay root nodes, and causes a regression for standard unspaced root nodes.
> --
> 
> --- Patch [3]: [PATCH v3 03/11] dtc: dt-check-style: Handle root node in overlays ---
> commit 099936d5537a0ed41e9b6886979ab1b9de2421d1
> Author: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@oss.qualcomm.com>
> 
> dtc: dt-check-style: Handle root node in overlays
> 
> This patch aims to handle root nodes in overlays correctly by detecting
> them and storing an is_root attribute in DtsLine, intending to fix false
> positives for property order.
> 
>> This fixes false positives for property order for root nodes in overlays.
> 
> [Severity: Medium]
> Does this patch actually update check_property_order()? 
> 
> The diff modifies check_child_name_order() instead, leaving the
> check_property_order() function completely unchanged.

False positive

> 
>> diff --git a/scripts/dtc/dt-check-style b/scripts/dtc/dt-check-style
>> index 96deffc0d8a7c..d9f76d6d9179e 100755
>> --- a/scripts/dtc/dt-check-style
>> +++ b/scripts/dtc/dt-check-style
> [ ... ]
>> @@ -228,7 +229,10 @@ def classify_lines(text):
>>              continue
>>  
>>          if code.endswith('{'):
>> -            dl = DtsLine(i, raw, LineType.NODE_OPEN, depth, indent_str, code)
>> +            is_root = False
>> +            if code == '&{/} {' or re.search(r'^/\s+\{$', code):
>> +                is_root = True
>> +            dl = DtsLine(i, raw, LineType.NODE_OPEN, depth, indent_str, code, is_root=is_root)
> 
> [Severity: Medium]
> Will this regex handle standard unspaced root nodes like "/{"?

Ack

> 
> The regex pattern ^/\s+\{$ strictly requires whitespace. Valid unspaced
> root nodes or labelled root nodes might bypass this logic and incorrectly
> evaluate to is_root = False.
> 
> [ ... ]
>> @@ -550,7 +554,9 @@ def check_child_name_order(ctx):
>>          for c in children:
>>              if c.node_addr is not None:
>>                  continue
>> -            if c.node_name in (None, '/'):
>> +            if c.node_name is None:
>> +                continue
>> +            if c.is_root:
>>                  continue
> 
> [Severity: Medium]
> Is the c.is_root check reachable for overlay root nodes?

Seems this change is not needed.

Best regards,
Krzysztof