From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; t=1792835002; b=KMRjx7bb4yv17n8lsPg3ovEeHu3tQbtY6BmR7jV9NG/SmnVhVns4FfPgoHpAhbJ4LUd1 zRxTjdWkYwAqUGqATTJeRH96WVMO5QeOFGWFdgOvI9Y46hsBSFbNtGaUJ7pc5GuhbtpEX pvNjXmdmDlbC+KA8Z+GFB9CJ7H51v2Iu6nqeOxNi1ON1TC61oUE6tY7qWk6R845k1rnPu MAwUbF5DuHhlGwDdl4ySGWsCBq8IVqoXRtJE09+ibqxt38CUlyquwAFjAZwnXDz/j1gUB JfPUh1bY2npwiGBQhEDQA+kE/6cMtZSd6dah2+S9sFtUjdzLPdjASjnGmdSdH4Eo1Bw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1792835002; h=Received:DKIM-Signature:Message-ID:From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc: In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Date; bh=A7azV5uLU4FMr+J4e+zMGdB823xNGjMoVPnugt2NTrc=; b=oKX+IBykOOIiLV0JduX8ZPsqpuheCyk6etXl0CrSYUSxyvdawBX13Fn5LUQKk/2tHB8Q VYjLyH0daXkgJPYDWt77TQj8ckGjHWD9bhPOS2e+6vkrL6uKFQYplWy+FNeVMXnBHslcw Y/ABLZkzaFVwDAl3ii9qF3/4e653Q246LQHoDgcZHHV0RlyfTarHNwEolehL+w1QADKlq o4ENR5Z4X7UTetmYDKtUWUL3c926qINjrbDuMlwKc85IdilwAkCinAFW2AcWeSK4HKknh 3Q7unxJ0djZrGRpz50AKIWzWyYl5MDBfTX1g5qFVp5zGhPAC0ZUNTiChs6L48Bf8+9g== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20260515 header.b=CrC6469w; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=100.103.45.18 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (quasi.space.kernel.org [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 57576606A31A for ; Sat, 24 Oct 2026 09:43:22 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20260515 header.b=CrC6469w Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B6E3D1F01825; Sat, 24 Oct 2026 09:43:21 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1792835002; bh=A7azV5uLU4FMr+J4e+zMGdB823xNGjMoVPnugt2NTrc=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=CrC6469wXzpe3eVonRTojs1Pwkx+otj4/OWG8RvtWe2Ht2OCuIl82I2lxCRBqsgIT QG+NmqCDZBs+D4n14m+ByTZ1eC70qlebBLwwRNvrhuCQkCDjDfdFDcx4wCBAwWj0Q9 BBx42ZNOi/wYobJK/28o5va//f0aC0Av3xjSD8/QQ3N52MSJ4WeJoidvK9EXRYonfV bx0nnqlqMPGePrkxzDGgewrv/qwAkjI75KpShhN0kkJmxvAkV84Nu/dKRN7Bnq+LGL f5XrATUWD/gZhopldmMHG6FUB/vAWJckLCwFIZIFqPdp7Qov9iD2PEb30iL6V64jc8 cTk+NK5PDDXAA== Message-ID: From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 5/7] riscv: dts: ultrarisc: Add initial device tree for UltraRISC DP1000 Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: "Xincheng Ji" Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, robh@kernel.org, conor+dt@kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20261024-ultrarisc-dts-v6-5-c62994d8a114@ultrarisc.com> References: <20261024-ultrarisc-dts-v6-0-c62994d8a114@ultrarisc.com> <20261024-ultrarisc-dts-v6-5-c62994d8a114@ultrarisc.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2026 09:43:21 +0000 X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: List-Owner: Precedence: list Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(= s) to consider: - [Low] riscv: dts: ultrarisc: duplicate unit-address in dp1000.dtsi plic n= ode name -- commit 65da27c69d1760ac79d94c2145794b0d0a24ad1f Author: Jia Wang riscv: dts: ultrarisc: Add initial device tree for UltraRISC DP1000 This commit adds the initial base device tree for the UltraRISC DP1000 SoC, describing the eight CP100 CPU cores, cache hierarchy, and core peripherals. > diff --git a/arch/riscv/boot/dts/ultrarisc/dp1000.dtsi b/arch/riscv/boot/= dts/ultrarisc/dp1000.dtsi > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000000000..f8f29df1801f4 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/arch/riscv/boot/dts/ultrarisc/dp1000.dtsi > @@ -0,0 +1,865 @@ [ ... ] > + soc { > + compatible =3D "simple-bus"; > + ranges; > + #address-cells =3D <2>; > + #size-cells =3D <2>; [ ... ] > + plic: interrupt-controller@9000000@9000000 { > + compatible =3D "ultrarisc,dp1000-plic", "ultrarisc,cp100-plic"; > + reg =3D <0x0 0x9000000 0x0 0x4000000>; [Severity: Low] Should the plic node name be interrupt-controller@9000000 instead of interrupt-controller@9000000@9000000? The duplicated @9000000 suffix causes dtc to fail compilation in scripts/dtc/checks.c:check_node_name_format() when building any board device tree that includes dp1000.dtsi: if (strchr(get_unitname(node), '@')) FAIL(c, dti, node, "multiple '@' characters in node name"); It also causes check_simple_bus_reg() and dtbs_check validation to fail because the unit-address does not match the reg property address. --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261024-ultrarisc-= dts-v6-0-c62994d8a114@ultrarisc.com?part=3D5