Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: imx95: Add ADLINK LEC-iMX95 board support

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] arm64: dts: imx95: missing open-drain bit in pinctrl_lpi2c8 pad config
- [Low] arm64: dts: imx95: undocumented adlink vendor prefix in compatible
--

commit 248f6e79db5b8ae0d4d8bd60d96acbf1ad1f767b
Author: Dinesh kumar v <dineshkumarv85@gmail.com>

arm64: dts: imx95: Add ADLINK LEC-iMX95 board support

This commit adds device tree descriptions for the ADLINK LEC-iMX95 System on
Module and the I-Pi SMARC Plus carrier board.

> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx95-lec-ipi-smarc.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx95-lec-ipi-smarc.dts
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000000..9a77bff42b225
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx95-lec-ipi-smarc.dts
> @@ -0,0 +1,237 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later OR MIT
> +/*
> + * Copyright (C) 2026 ADLINK Technology Inc.
> + *
> + * https://www.adlinktech.com/products/Computer_on_Modules/SMARC/LEC-IMX95
> + * https://www.adlinktech.com/products/computer_on_modules/SMARCStarterKits/I-Pi_SMARC_IMX95
> + */
> +
> +/dts-v1/;
> +
> +#include "imx95-lec.dtsi"
> +
> +/ {
> +	model = "ADLINK LEC-iMX95 on I-Pi SMARC Plus Carrier Board";
> +	compatible = "adlink,lec-imx95-ipi-smarc",
> +		     "adlink,lec-imx95",
> +		     "fsl,imx95";
> +};

[Severity: Low]
The root node uses the "adlink" vendor prefix in its compatible property,
along with the new board and module compatible strings, but "adlink" does
not appear in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml and
the compatible strings are not documented in
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/fsl.yaml.

Should the vendor prefix and board compatible bindings be documented so
dtbs_check and checkpatch.pl pass without undocumented DT string warnings?

> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx95-lec.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx95-lec.dtsi
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000000..5402cb360888a
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx95-lec.dtsi

[ ... ]

> +&scmi_iomuxc {

[ ... ]

> +	pinctrl_lpi2c2: lpi2c2grp {
> +		fsl,pins = <IMX95_PAD_I2C2_SCL__AONMIX_TOP_LPI2C2_SCL		0x40000b9e>,
> +			   <IMX95_PAD_I2C2_SDA__AONMIX_TOP_LPI2C2_SDA		0x40000b9e>;
> +	};
> +
> +	pinctrl_lpi2c3: lpi2c3grp {
> +		fsl,pins = <IMX95_PAD_GPIO_IO28__LPI2C3_SDA			0x40000b9e>,
> +			   <IMX95_PAD_GPIO_IO29__LPI2C3_SCL			0x40000b9e>;
> +	};
> +
> +	pinctrl_lpi2c8: lpi2c8grp {
> +		fsl,pins = <IMX95_PAD_GPIO_IO13__LPI2C8_SCL		0x4000007e>,
> +			   <IMX95_PAD_GPIO_IO12__LPI2C8_SDA		0x4000007e>;
> +	};

[Severity: Medium]
In pinctrl_lpi2c8, IMX95_PAD_GPIO_IO13__LPI2C8_SCL and
IMX95_PAD_GPIO_IO12__LPI2C8_SDA are configured with 0x4000007e rather than
0x40000b9e as used in pinctrl_lpi2c2 and pinctrl_lpi2c3 above.

On i.MX95, bit 11 (0x800) of the IOMUXC pad control register enables
open-drain output and bit 9 (0x200) enables the internal pull-up. With
0x4000007e, both bits are cleared while lpi2c8 is enabled in
imx95-lec-ipi-smarc.dts, driving the I2C8 SCL and SDA lines as push-pull
outputs.

Should pinctrl_lpi2c8 use 0x40000b9e so that open-drain mode is enabled on
the I2C8 bus?

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261102065645.121046-1-dinesh.v@adlinktech.com?part=2