Re: [PATCH 2/2] ARM: dts: zynq: Add ALINX AX7Z020B development board

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 3 potential
issues to consider:
- [Low] ARM: dts: zynq: undocumented vendor prefix alinx in root
  compatible strings
- [Low] ARM: dts: zynq: decimal unit-addresses in XADC channel@10 and
  channel@13 nodes
- [Low] ARM: dts: zynq: split root node blocks in
  zynq-alinx-ac7z020.dtsi
--

commit ad140ae8401a6613bfd0e62dbc79a92d188f222b
Author: Pufan Jin <cyan2254650260@gmail.com>

ARM: dts: zynq: Add ALINX AX7Z020B development board

This commit adds devicetree support for the ALINX AC7Z020 system on module
and the ALINX AX7Z020B development board.

Link: https://www.alinx.com/

> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/xilinx/zynq-alinx-ac7z020.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/xilinx/zynq-alinx-ac7z020.dtsi
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000000..2da08424f1a2a
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/xilinx/zynq-alinx-ac7z020.dtsi
> @@ -0,0 +1,72 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +/*
> + * DTS for ALINX AC7Z020 System on Module
> + *
> + * Copyright (C) 2026 Pufan Jin <cyan2254650260@gmail.com>
> + */
> +
> +#include "zynq-7000.dtsi"
> +
> +/ {
> +	compatible = "alinx,ac7z020", "xlnx,zynq-7000";

[Severity: Low]
Should the "alinx" vendor prefix used here and in zynq-alinx-ax7z020b.dts
be documented in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml?
Without an "^alinx,.*" entry there, checkpatch.pl and dtbs_check report an
undocumented vendor prefix.

> +
> +	memory@0 {
> +		device_type = "memory";
> +		reg = <0x0 0x40000000>;
> +	};
> +};
> +
> +&clkc {
> +	ps-clk-frequency = <33333333>;
> +};
> +
> +&devcfg {
> +	status = "okay";
> +};
> +
> +/ {
> +	pmu@f8891000 {
> +		interrupt-affinity = <&cpu0>, <&cpu1>;
> +	};
> +};

[Severity: Low]
This isn't a bug, but why reopen a second root node block after &clkc and
&devcfg instead of placing pmu@f8891000 inside the initial / { ... }; block
above per Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dts-coding-style.rst?

[ ... ]

> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/xilinx/zynq-alinx-ax7z020b.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/xilinx/zynq-alinx-ax7z020b.dts
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000000..4dfef96ad376a
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/xilinx/zynq-alinx-ax7z020b.dts

[ ... ]

> +&adc {
> +	xlnx,channels {
> +		#address-cells = <1>;
> +		#size-cells = <0>;
> +
> +		/* AD1: XADC_AD1P/N, E17/D18 */
> +		channel@2 {
> +			reg = <2>;
> +		};
> +
> +		/* AD9: XADC_AD9P/N, E18/E19 */
> +		channel@10 {
> +			reg = <10>;
> +		};
> +
> +		/* Spare pair: XADC_AD12P/N, F19/F20 */
> +		channel@13 {
> +			reg = <13>;
> +		};
> +	};
> +};

[Severity: Low]
Should channel@10 and channel@13 be named channel@a and channel@d?
Unit-addresses after @ are lowercase hexadecimal without a 0x prefix, while
reg = <10> and reg = <13> are decimal (0xa and 0xd).

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261108215010.351256-1-cyan2254650260@gmail.com?part=2