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 AFC4C3803DC for ; Sat, 17 Oct 2026 15:26:30 +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=1792250791; cv=none; b=aWFCvglIH3WmMQWx+GP04+hqvnvEkxd16PK1tHxnrVh54NDImgXQXlkmJbhjEHVgnVLZGNgJ2YpWiV7E2QLBCVzktKU/WcQtPsMDr8W4NP7itNpel/UpiX3mFZrlPfnwljSdSfLPSS6Db2CK0Xumj4LLI1i7adEq00zi07NMNgw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1792250791; c=relaxed/simple; bh=hJVodDmlbBkg2bxojpgn5BB4oHlMuP2WAOrlR01/DXA=; h=Message-ID:From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type: Date; b=r1wWsQWMXHPOLy70uSeuhDe3dxrTRTcMRJ6zrw4taNKSNBLJlgGo+G78w6V2J5kPCY96IZuIERCO0jEK3U7P2T7QjfI4G2sqFAYstw/OQF+8mYCs8FyTuhpMnEjlzsDpTI0r8431289bygLcmp+RwkQPJhLvVwIfOpZGsy8djxw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=lm1PyNvi; 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="lm1PyNvi" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 09F551F000C4; Sat, 17 Oct 2026 15:26:29 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1792250790; bh=FHqWeqWhG/qbaWsDAh8iKz48uTFEkbDn1oz0iRgHgs4=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=lm1PyNviauSRIlFUesR8RdX6v4LwzeO0cX6d/WLyNdokel1oigSt5wfvikxsQISLQ zZIpG0mRNCClIuEISDzi3bhATCqMAiJum5fXBdy+NI4fQ3nUZhHUIKjlN8L6dHLomM UlOmb1cGRIi/l2KwG/gMZvA8OKpgKYxzq4GL/LKmiBi35Cr2Yzf3uE6l0xtdRyQAk9 r5FxkaIk34p5QaXWPjX7Xh4RK3J2nxvlI0srFbRiqbo14FYB+98jtB7G39KOxX2cgC MZm6U/53xssEWieivOyNzXDSo3pspls3z6p6MUvRt9euaU7Cxt+aVgLj0tFdr2fGtV zaP5gaRTw4pjg== Message-ID: From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] arm64: dts: qcom: Add sm8250-oneplus-common.dtsi Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: "Frieder Hannenheim" Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, robh@kernel.org, conor+dt@kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20261017-kebab_dts-v3-2-5fc3ca52a383@fhannenheim.net> References: <20261017-kebab_dts-v3-0-5fc3ca52a383@fhannenheim.net> <20261017-kebab_dts-v3-2-5fc3ca52a383@fhannenheim.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2026 15:26:29 +0000 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] arm64: dts: qcom: duplicate KEY_VOLUMEDOWN on gpio-keys and pon_= resin -- commit 7ef24e1b9b48012e8e7fa23614b055d4480b386c Author: Frieder Hannenheim arm64: dts: qcom: Add sm8250-oneplus-common.dtsi This commit adds a common device tree include file for OnePlus devices based on the Qualcomm SM8250 SoC, defining shared reserved memory regions, regulators, PMIC GPIOs, PON keys, and UFS configuration. > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8250-oneplus-common.dtsi b/arch/a= rm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8250-oneplus-common.dtsi > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000000000..6d7793c792f05 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8250-oneplus-common.dtsi > @@ -0,0 +1,607 @@ [ ... ] > + gpio_keys: gpio-keys { > + compatible =3D "gpio-keys"; > + label =3D "Volume keys"; > + > + pinctrl-0 =3D <&vol_down_l &vol_up_n>; > + pinctrl-names =3D "default"; > + > + key-vol-down { > + label =3D "Volume Down"; > + linux,code =3D ; > + gpios =3D <&pm8150_gpios 7 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>; > + debounce-interval =3D <15>; > + linux,can-disable; > + wakeup-source; > + }; > + > + key-vol-up { > + label =3D "Volume Up"; > + gpios =3D <&pm8150_gpios 6 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>; > + linux,code =3D ; > + debounce-interval =3D <15>; > + linux,can-disable; > + wakeup-source; > + }; > + }; [ ... ] > +&pm8150_gpios { > + vol_up_n: vol-up-n-state { > + pins =3D "gpio6"; > + function =3D "normal"; > + power-source =3D <1>; > + input-enable; > + bias-pull-up; > + }; > + > + vol_down_l: vol-down-l-state { > + pins =3D "gpio7"; > + function =3D "normal"; > + power-source =3D <1>; > + input-enable; > + bias-pull-up; > + }; > +}; > + > +&pon { > + mode-bootloader =3D <0x2>; > + mode-recovery =3D <0x1>; > +}; > + > +&pon_pwrkey { > + status =3D "okay"; > +}; > + > +&pon_resin { > + linux,code =3D ; > + > + status =3D "okay"; > +}; [Severity: Medium] Should KEY_VOLUMEDOWN be registered in both gpio_keys (via key-vol-down on pm8150_gpios 7) and pon_resin? With both nodes enabled, both the gpio-keys driver and the pm8941-pwrkey driver probe and register active wakeup-capable input devices for KEY_VOLUMEDOWN. Depending on how the physical button is wired on these boards, wouldn't this either emit duplicate KEY_VOLUMEDOWN events across two separate input devices on every button press, or leave one of the two input drivers monitoring an unconnected or wrong PMIC pin? [ ... ] --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261017-kebab_dts-= v3-0-5fc3ca52a383@fhannenheim.net?part=3D2