From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Konrad Dybcio" <konradybcio@kernel.org>
Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, vkoul@kernel.org, robh@kernel.org,
neil.armstrong@linaro.org, linux-phy@lists.infradead.org,
conor+dt@kernel.org, olteanv@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] dt-bindings: phy: qcom,qusb2: Straighten out SM6125 and MSM8996
Date: Thu, 03 Sep 2026 14:46:55 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260903144655.BB1791F00A3A@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260903-topic-8996_61x5_qusb2phy-v2-1-4c3f980a4560@oss.qualcomm.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] The binding change causes dtbs_check to fail for existing in-tree MSM8996 and SM6125 device trees, and introduces an architectural disconnect with the driver's unconditional regulator requests.
--
commit a8357f1a883ddad429bf80e6c26f5fba143404de
Author: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@oss.qualcomm.com>
dt-bindings: phy: qcom,qusb2: Straighten out SM6125 and MSM8996
SM6125 DT currently uses just the MSM8996 compatible (without a primary
SM6125-specific one). This commit adds a new compatible for SM6125 with
a SM6115 fallback. It also updates the MSM8996 binding to require
power-domains and required-opps instead of vdd-supply.
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,qusb2-phy.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,qusb2-phy.yaml
> index 001fd0ccc9852..cfc5a1d16b7f2 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,qusb2-phy.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,qusb2-phy.yaml
[ ... ]
> @@ -187,6 +195,22 @@ allOf:
> qcom,preemphasis-width: false
> qcom,hsdisc-trim-value: false
>
> + # On MSM8996, VDD is supplied via the MX power domain
> + - if:
> + properties:
> + compatible:
> + const: qcom,msm8996-qusb2-phy
> + then:
> + required:
> + - power-domains
> + - required-opps
[Severity: Medium]
Will this break dtbs_check for existing in-tree MSM8996 and SM6125 device
trees by mandating power-domains for MSM8996 before the in-tree device
trees are updated?
While this dtbs_check breakage is resolved later in the series by commit
"arm64: dts: qcom: msm8996: Add VDD_MX to QUSB2 PHYs" and commit
"arm64: dts: qcom: sm6125: Fix QUSB2 compatible", does this change create
an architectural disconnect with the driver that remains unresolved?
Looking at drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qusb2.c, it unconditionally
requires the vdd regulator:
drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qusb2.c:qusb2_phy_vreg_names[] = {
"vdd", "vdda-pll", "vdda-phy-dpdm",
};
If a strictly schema-compliant device tree omits vdd-supply for MSM8996,
would this cause the driver to fail probing when it unconditionally fetches
vdd via devm_regulator_bulk_get()?
> + else:
> + properties:
> + power-domains: false
> + required-opps: false
> + required:
> + - vdd-supply
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260903-topic-8996_61x5_qusb2phy-v2-0-4c3f980a4560@oss.qualcomm.com?part=1
--
linux-phy mailing list
linux-phy@lists.infradead.org
https://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-phy
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-03 14:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-03 14:25 [PATCH v2 0/5] Fix up QUSB2 PHY description for MSM8996/SM61[12]5 Konrad Dybcio
2026-09-03 14:25 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] dt-bindings: phy: qcom,qusb2: Straighten out SM6125 and MSM8996 Konrad Dybcio
2026-09-03 14:46 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-09-03 14:25 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] phy: qcom-qusb2: Fix SM6115 init sequence Konrad Dybcio
2026-09-03 14:25 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] phy: qcom-qusb2: Remove _SHIFT defines Konrad Dybcio
2026-09-03 15:03 ` Abel Vesa
2026-09-03 14:25 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] arm64: dts: qcom: msm8996: Add VDD_MX to QUSB2 PHYs Konrad Dybcio
2026-09-03 15:02 ` Abel Vesa
2026-09-03 14:25 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] arm64: dts: qcom: sm6125: Fix QUSB2 compatible Konrad Dybcio
2026-09-03 15:01 ` Abel Vesa
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=20260903144655.BB1791F00A3A@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=conor+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=konradybcio@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-phy@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=neil.armstrong@linaro.org \
--cc=olteanv@gmail.com \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=vkoul@kernel.org \
/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