From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Hongmei Xu" <hongmei.xu@oss.qualcomm.com>
Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, robh@kernel.org, conor+dt@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: nvmem: add byte-mask property for non-contiguous byte selection
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2026 08:02:29 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <sashiko-outbox-212378@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261113-nvmem-byte-mask-for-split-macaddr-v1-1-138f715f18c1@oss.qualcomm.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential
issues to consider:
- [Medium] dt-bindings: nvmem: byte-mask redefines reg size and accesses
beyond reg
- [Low] dt-bindings: nvmem: missing hardware motivation for byte-mask in
changelog
--
commit f8160f5bc1c29ed4ba48f6d458beb8ca96b09427
Author: Hongmei Xu <hongmei.xu@oss.qualcomm.com>
> dt-bindings: nvmem: add byte-mask property for non-contiguous byte selection
>
> Add the byte-mask property to the fixed-cell binding. This allows
> selecting non-contiguous physical bytes from an NVMEM region to form
> a logical cell value.
>
> Bit N set in byte-mask means physical byte N relative to the cell's
> base offset is included in the output; selected bytes are packed into
> the output buffer in ascending byte order. If fewer bytes are selected
> than the cell's logical size given by reg, the remaining output bytes
> are zero-filled. The number of set bits must not exceed the cell's
> logical size given by reg. byte-mask and bits are mutually exclusive.
>
> Signed-off-by: Hongmei Xu <hongmei.xu@oss.qualcomm.com>
[Severity: Low]
Could the commit message explain the hardware layout that motivates
byte-mask? It repeats the property rules from the schema, but does not
describe which SoC or NVMEM layout splits a logical cell across
non-contiguous physical bytes or why existing mechanisms such as multiple
reg entries or a device-specific layout are insufficient.
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/layouts/fixed-cell.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/layouts/fixed-cell.yaml
> index 38e3ad50ff4fb..cddda3f706917 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/layouts/fixed-cell.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/layouts/fixed-cell.yaml
> @@ -34,6 +34,21 @@ properties:
> description:
> Size in bit within the address range specified by reg.
>
> + byte-mask:
> + $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32
> + minimum: 1
> + description: >
> + Bitmask selecting which physical bytes within the NVMEM device region
> + contribute to this cell's output. Bit N set means physical byte N
> + relative to the cell's base offset is included; selected bytes are
> + packed into the output buffer in ascending byte order. If fewer bytes
> + are selected than the cell's logical size given by reg, the remaining
> + output bytes are zero-filled. Byte positions are relative to the cell's
> + base offset and limited to a 32-byte window. The highest set bit must
> + not reference a byte beyond the device size. The number of set bits must
> + not exceed the cell's logical size given by reg. Cannot be used
> + together with bits.
[Severity: Medium]
Does byte-mask conflict with standard reg semantics by treating the reg
size as a logical output buffer size while reading physical bytes outside
the reg range?
Any non-contiguous selection of K bytes spans at least K + 1 physical
bytes (highest set bit H >= K). A Devicetree author must then either set
the reg size to K and access physical bytes up to offset + H outside the
declared reg range, hiding overlaps with sibling cells, or set the reg
size to the physical span M >= H + 1, which pads the output to M bytes and
breaks typed consumers like nvmem_cell_read_u32() that require the cell
size to match sizeof(*val).
Defining software zero-padding in reg also puts buffer formatting policy
into the hardware description, and the binding leaves write semantics for
cells with byte-mask undefined.
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261113-nvmem-byte-mask-for-split-macaddr-v1-0-138f715f18c1@oss.qualcomm.com?part=1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-11-13 8:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-11-13 7:52 [PATCH 0/2] nvmem: Add byte-mask support for non-contiguous byte selection Hongmei Xu
2026-11-13 7:52 ` [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: nvmem: add byte-mask property " Hongmei Xu
2026-11-13 8:02 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-11-13 7:52 ` [PATCH 2/2] nvmem: core: add byte-mask support for non-contiguous cell bytes Hongmei Xu
2026-11-13 8:07 ` sashiko-bot
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=sashiko-outbox-212378@kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=conor+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=hongmei.xu@oss.qualcomm.com \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox