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=1793778663; b=vY8aMHtzJfSnLNR7ESAnMpv3waGX6C6Fx6dJS9XfiF3xOeWBEbcJZ9IdFED8i2twevuE nqHgO6Xug6VECGKZCx1JnBGvv/WpaLBcV4ZjvszZqeAv/xLbqlDCbJTGM7i58KTaThTI6 ToZ9DvYNwAE8n2R6IxMPOBwF8kdZaEF2ZrJMCD8djUeATIBtREJmqwYyBh/Nf2EvaKUV1 iHvrLLgNX7rLokamlymH5+F3WU8hNXM29njaGjPEND9KsPpw2TC45s2WrHSJMuYziWUV3 7cpUSiGAmaSKr0khFjCp7ay/axNnLTDXaIlVRUQLlqw/m6o8O2UqIIBxBctbeVhyEJA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1793778663; h=Received:DKIM-Signature:Message-ID:From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc: In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Date; bh=Pd1LeG4YSyVzhkAEDrQRjo9EK9eodI/Jl3tuo5xNq2A=; b=D8ujTwXFlMZuyA9+Monzdiwlf7VJDYyBxzUkrqwn9dPeSvimfWtkUWDuG+EYMGC8Tiyx v/Mt9J/lF/CccIGZCzyg4M4W/Ud6fPQxhRjTQY7zAmbjqHaZYo6ErCNRUjWCv/0rK/HaD Crh+sKkpYh2Et0T0ThXE8s2er+02Wa1T5A6Dpi+0Ff0EqPQqFsccA+20jezTaGmuZIB3F QapEEfUZ7KWHAGFe9rrjy9yhfIIMRxDEScaQBPtGZLo0SIqMS4FFEMmq4lA+tUupRNYpI nu/KPwcQern2HDCpGbfd4mbBuPLq1M8zaCg+tOx1QSdh13oWuo51xodGSrJY7ingprw== 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=bE9Py9Tr; 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 4F07E606D805 for ; Wed, 4 Nov 2026 07:51:03 +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=bE9Py9Tr Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B167D1F00A02; Wed, 4 Nov 2026 07:51:02 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1793778663; bh=Pd1LeG4YSyVzhkAEDrQRjo9EK9eodI/Jl3tuo5xNq2A=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=bE9Py9TrIWlL4Z8pJU+Mlk3LorzHI7WnypNpD9drkkqFqGWDbVYjRD7N5s4oowRsy fPFIUrMoZY2hHPHvwIIYLo0HX+zMm5fJK/G4CR9vsYNPE8DVbvr6Xi4BQ8yJlUzZWf 930618CPfb7hqMJG2czqhwxgIY6mSW3I2H8hPeHJdpiWB/OaYOEiIaAHqWXg4+ZzCp xqAw93FNvm+mQXlIfYjcz5uZ23uMtk0F3FSa45C3bO7m1aXbBFjWZKBLryYkRkTE+Y s6amxXAlpq4CIOAbDUrv6ocHZIsjfiEmQhTfcYzJfPUJ4Uo7hK7JjYD+2/oZ474+KD 3dlWZMdP/mlSg== Message-ID: From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: qcom: sc8180x: Add SLPI remoteproc node Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: "Val Packett" Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, robh@kernel.org, conor+dt@kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20261104074200.123842-1-val@packett.cool> References: <20261104074200.123842-1-val@packett.cool> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2026 07:51:02 +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] arm64: dts: qcom: sc8180x: remoteproc_slpi compatible violates DT b= inding -- commit 0d379b187776a8ea6d877b7ca4de413f6a03989d Author: Val Packett arm64: dts: qcom: sc8180x: Add SLPI remoteproc node This commit adds the Sensors Low-Power Island (SLPI) remoteproc device tree node to sc8180x.dtsi. > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc8180x.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/= qcom/sc8180x.dtsi > index a85e3211958d1..18f03aa62d85e 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc8180x.dtsi > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc8180x.dtsi > @@ -2259,6 +2259,67 @@ tcsr_mutex: hwlock@1f40000 { > #hwlock-cells =3D <1>; > }; > =20 > + remoteproc_slpi: remoteproc@2400000 { > + compatible =3D "qcom,sc8180x-slpi-pas", "qcom,sm8150-slpi-pas"; [Severity: Low] Does this two-entry compatible property pass dtbs_check against Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/qcom,sm8150-pas.yaml? In Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/qcom,sm8150-pas.yaml, qcom,sc8180x-slpi-pas is only permitted as a single standalone enum entry under properties:compatible: - enum: - qcom,sc8180x-adsp-pas - qcom,sc8180x-cdsp-pas - qcom,sc8180x-slpi-pas Additionally, the allOf conditional block in qcom,sm8150-pas.yaml that sele= cts the lcx and lmx power-domains checks compatible with enum rather than contains, which does not match a two-item compatible list: - if: properties: compatible: enum: - qcom,sc8180x-slpi-pas - qcom,sm8150-slpi-pas Looking at qcom_pas_of_match in drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_pas.c, the oth= er SC8180X remoteproc nodes use standalone compatible strings, while qcom,sc8180x-slpi-pas is not yet in the match table: { .compatible =3D "qcom,sc8180x-adsp-pas", .data =3D &sm8150_adsp_resource= }, { .compatible =3D "qcom,sc8180x-cdsp-pas", .data =3D &sm8150_cdsp_resource= }, { .compatible =3D "qcom,sc8180x-mpss-pas", .data =3D &sc8180x_mpss_resourc= e }, Should Documentation/devicetree/bindings/remoteproc/qcom,sm8150-pas.yaml be updated to allow qcom,sm8150-slpi-pas as a fallback for qcom,sc8180x-slpi-p= as (and use contains in the power-domains conditional), or should remoteproc_s= lpi use a single compatible string with qcom,sc8180x-slpi-pas added to qcom_pas_of_match? --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261104074200.1238= 42-1-val@packett.cool?part=3D1