On Thu, May 28, 2026 at 02:08:38PM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > On Thu, 28 May 2026 09:54:39 +0100 > Conor Dooley wrote: > > > On Wed, May 27, 2026 at 06:41:28PM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > > > On Mon, 25 May 2026 18:01:41 +0100 > > > Conor Dooley wrote: > > > > > > > Jonathan, > > > > > > > > Here's an example of the sort of stuff it complains about on every > > > > iteration. > > > > > > > Thanks. +cc linux-iio@vger.kernel.org > > > > > > > On Mon, May 25, 2026 at 11:11:44AM +0000, sashiko-bot@kernel.org wrote: > > > > > Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider: > > > > > - [Medium] The `dvdd-supply` property is utilized by the HX710B and mentioned in the commit message, but it is not enforced as a required property for the new compatible or included in the example. > > > Yup. This stuff needs fixing. > > > > > > > > - [Low] The `if` condition for the `avia,hx710b` compatible incorrectly uses `const` instead of `contains: const`, causing schema validation to always fail for HX710B nodes. > > > > > > This one I'm not sure on. Is it right? I tested by hacking > > > the example to have a supply it shouldn't and the schema validation failed > > > as expected making me think this is a false positive. > > > I have zero natural feel for yaml so no idea :) > > > > It's not the common pattern, but it does work. > > IIRC the difference between it and "contains: const: ..." is that it doesn't > > apply the condition when the compatible is used as a fallback. > > > Makes sense. Given we may have fallbacks in future, it would be > good to use contains version. Or change it in the future when the user of the fallback arrives, since the binding will need to be modified anyway at that point. That's why I didn't ask for the change to be made.