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 0C4EF3E315E; Tue, 22 Sep 2026 03:59:30 +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=1790049572; cv=none; b=LUpzMBmLFhysUsJ+EU3jsr2/MBireKvWQqWm75ZWpaIsqkosf93uClyhGOU923rRQs+Co04R/EHOwm6cvmlkDDL/oGQtfQE+NjLBhogjk3ZwJh4G0k5i71g0QUmyobm0clJjTCYObl0NILCZWHnDyFLu2/9wOpy1frniNMWx/ac= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790049572; c=relaxed/simple; bh=rIMhabhsld7aWT/P9bJ+u1zrYltWHl9nqVNnDXIzthY=; h=From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Date: Message-Id; b=LQqhSiwftryu210rHKF6BvYQSZ/eLJGdcE62tWHrq60+Kkp1ICTRxtn+S3/rJy0RwJKLBVFctavV+4HvcNEQCvtNKA1Kmg5S2UPUN4NSpCRBDOwAjqZ/o1JDWnPbGHrWT1rQKwJxdk/dOs6MjG2ig3JM1y9FAPTqMjgM6Mmuxik= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=k4G96OWi; 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="k4G96OWi" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 574341F000FF; Tue, 22 Sep 2026 03:59:30 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1790049570; bh=B12zAVjOiMw2LNquOPrpi1WpGskE7At8NieYxVeFRFQ=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=k4G96OWiyuvd+rHWRNbXpAaHyS3MuM4ObiZFX9yImElvBORzqVWjCdbcjIP0QF2Sa LkdX2xrDr3I4wnekamUAKsocSLLB9qzjChXOSZ5iMvfiQPw+ox+TA9td9JQZJ6Fvir cWfEthPe5TBbX4lHtsI/75k2FXmd3FFz2k998S4EM8Yi/kY64GWJur51CzQj7aFA4a vBV6NHVR3pi/xcp9gXVBv806IBUWtU3UPq/Ht0+RJ3igdOVFSLPPAXx+/rIdV3ngg0 pHVbdRrHCRWw0tcgVcyNgjVqyiFO/IY0WukL2qrQdV6er+kv+VPtlrd+YVUEWU6H3q JcHfzVNqaY5UA== From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] arm64: dts: allwinner: add a523 msgbox and remoteproc nodes Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: "Tim Michals" Cc: linux-sunxi@lists.linux.dev, conor+dt@kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, robh@kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20260922034711.190253-8-tcmichals@gmail.com> References: <20260922034711.190253-1-tcmichals@gmail.com> <20260922034711.190253-8-tcmichals@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2026 03:59:29 +0000 Message-Id: <20260922035930.574341F000FF@smtp.kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-sunxi@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(= s) to consider: - [Low] dts: dt-binding schema violation in remoteproc compatible property - [Low] dts: simple-bus node sorting violation for mailbox@3003000 -- commit 38cf09c8de53fb563929c96a81218691b32c1fef Author: Tim Michals arm64: dts: allwinner: add a523 msgbox and remoteproc nodes This commit adds the hardware mailbox and XuanTie RISC-V remoteproc nodes f= or Allwinner A523/A527 SoCs. It also connects the remoteproc node to the necessary clocks, resets, and mailboxes for lifecycle management and IPC. > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun55i-a523.dtsi b/arch/arm64/= boot/dts/allwinner/sun55i-a523.dtsi > index 85ef492ffeae7..7c5c39c568583 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun55i-a523.dtsi > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun55i-a523.dtsi > @@ -1144,5 +1144,44 @@ npu: npu@7122000 { > resets =3D <&mcu_ccu RST_BUS_MCU_NPU>; > power-domains =3D <&ppu PD_NPU>; > }; > + > + msgbox: mailbox@3003000 { [Severity: Low] Does this placement violate the device tree simple-bus unit address sorting conventions? Typically, nodes within a simple-bus are sorted sequentially = by unit address in ascending order. Placing mailbox@3003000 after npu@7122000 breaks this ordering. Should this node be moved earlier in the file to sit between dma-controller@3002000 and efuse@3006000 to maintain correct sorting? > + compatible =3D "allwinner,sun55i-a523-msgbox"; > + reg =3D <0x03003000 0x1000>, > + <0x07094000 0x1000>, > + <0x07120000 0x1000>, > + <0x07136000 0x1000>; > + reg-names =3D "arm", "dsp", "cpus", "rv"; [ ... ] > + rproc: remoteproc@7130000 { > + compatible =3D "allwinner,sun55i-a523-rproc", > + "allwinner,sun55i-a527-rproc"; [Severity: Low] Will this multi-string compatible property pass device tree validation? The dt-binding for allwinner,sun55i-rproc.yaml defines the compatible property strictly as an enum containing allwinner,sun55i-a523-rproc, allwinner,sun55i-a527-rproc, and allwinner,sun55i-t527-rproc. Since the schema uses enum instead of an items list, it requires the value = to be exactly one of the listed strings. Could this be changed to specify a single compatible string to prevent dtbs_check warnings? > + reg =3D <0x07130000 0x1000>, > + <0x07280000 0x40000>, --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260922034711.1902= 53-1-tcmichals@gmail.com?part=3D7