From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1BD633CCFB8; Fri, 4 Sep 2026 10:59:14 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788519555; cv=none; b=f7a9uWeBaaTnSmVpJKQgxAWgPZln8UTUUPWSw4lgaSimnV5ZXJyQGbmaHbhaiAWmBegr+KaRUZm/gPwfCJ+FoeUxL3r9bilgpqjbv34gaXHe1ovLkcnDX5bFYZlKUB2bgkIlhB0w8GMXk5cdcPlmSe5WyENRaWs2AWoQLJwTy20= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788519555; c=relaxed/simple; bh=VUi9SCTudcyuBGy1AI1bKBDs+Zh/rJ3hjz5BokKBQTI=; h=From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Date: Message-Id; b=E6jRJ/+dIrFOfq5b5WhchxqSl4lu3QKkEQF5ZW9TU1q6fizYIrEuRXVXNukoSWk1mcSosVygMhOwI8AMOIjxPqYQvmFcp4cLC21v2qA+ayVybe3ILVZS6I2U3R2S/ltVj7F7mvkp3wBH8KEEe3MhL7kYi+HIoekTlJVV/NGIDT0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=HFcr9HD8; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="HFcr9HD8" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4A0C41F00A3D; Fri, 4 Sep 2026 10:59:13 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1788519554; bh=Q+wqxRlCl56rmCgZUANVMFMBl1TB3QdhwDp33qiHBpQ=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=HFcr9HD8XjwG6DfLthj7/5e6PXE6rBFFnBzTLpo4gtQNg+PP/PT6XSI/IN7CKzsvs OW2SDkt7/p7dPO5ibUgrdc3/g3ZnAoi6/BQmkirChU1+65n2F0kewHCRMD1bln+BoO zbSe6mjSrKeIiOz6GewzQ3NFEWoZt+fd4lU6RW21xX6Y+onLRRYFmXyieAmneOAx9g vmIpaePsV5raRB6fzVMubIAUhhT8iFSR/eLMPMaffi1bO3d02S5Kfp+WGDIswtzKfR X7rtIY67ftrJ0+1lQIBd/W39/SYFzQ7mG7QCOEHapKd9bU+NMM9qlwDSx05j9Vubzx 4aQ+RnawBtOBQ== From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 01/12] dt-bindings: reserved-memory: Document Tegra VPR Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: "Thierry Reding" Cc: conor+dt@kernel.org, "Christian Borntraeger" , "Heiko Carstens" , "Alexander Gordeev" , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org, robh@kernel.org, media-ci@linuxtv.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, "Vasily Gorbik" , linux-s390@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20260904-tegra-vpr-v6-1-79042cfa8de5@nvidia.com> References: <20260904-tegra-vpr-v6-0-79042cfa8de5@nvidia.com> <20260904-tegra-vpr-v6-1-79042cfa8de5@nvidia.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Fri, 04 Sep 2026 10:59:12 +0000 Message-Id: <20260904105913.4A0C41F00A3D@smtp.kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(= s) to consider: - [Low] The examples fail to provide a `reserved-memory` parent node to est= ablish the `#address-cells` and `#size-cells` context, leading to schema va= lidation failures. -- commit f2d3906971093a4dcbac5c42465c2d0d7ce5d0a8 Author: Thierry Reding dt-bindings: reserved-memory: Document Tegra VPR This commit adds device tree bindings for the NVIDIA Tegra Video Protection Region (VPR), documenting both fixed and resizable variants. > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reserved-memory/nvidia,teg= ra-video-protection-region.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reserve= d-memory/nvidia,tegra-video-protection-region.yaml > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000000000..862bfd3913786 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reserved-memory/nvidia,tegra-vide= o-protection-region.yaml [ ... ] > +examples: > + - | > + /* resizable VPR */ > + protected { > + compatible =3D "nvidia,tegra-video-protection-region"; > + > + size =3D <0x0 0x70000000>; [Severity: Low] Will this fail make dt_binding_check during schema validation? Since the example lacks an explicit reserved-memory parent node to establish the #address-cells and #size-cells context, dtschema wraps this in a dummy root node with a default of #size-cells =3D <1>. Supplying 2 cells for the size here exceeds that implicit constraint. > + alignment =3D <0x0 0x100000>; [Severity: Low] Similarly, does this 2-cell alignment array violate the implicit #size-cells =3D <1> constraint for the same reason? > + reusable; > + }; > + > + - | > + /* fixed VPR */ > + protected@a8000000 { > + compatible =3D "nvidia,tegra-video-protection-region"; > + > + /* fixed VPR */ > + reg =3D <0xa8000000 0x70000000>; [Severity: Low] Without a shared parent node to explicitly declare #address-cells and #size-cells contexts, does this 2-cell reg property parse under the default 1-cell context (treating address=3D0xa8000000 and size=3D0x70000000)? This creates a semantic mismatch with the 64-bit lengths intended in the first example. Wrapping the examples in a reserved-memory parent node might resolve these context issues. > + no-map; > + }; --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260904-tegra-vpr-= v6-0-79042cfa8de5@nvidia.com?part=3D1