Re: [PATCH v1 03/11] dt-bindings: pinctrl: add Allwinner B288 pin controller

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 3 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] dt-bindings: pinctrl: missing reference to core pinctrl schema
- [Medium] dt-bindings: pinctrl: missing input-debounce breaks sunxi standard feature
- [Low] dt-bindings: pinctrl: missing minItems: 4 for exact interrupt banks
--

commit f5fef062c858980d1528aafec20b7e540cfb4cbb
Author: Pablo Mazzini <pmazzini@gmail.com>

dt-bindings: pinctrl: add Allwinner B288 pin controller

This commit introduces device tree bindings for the Allwinner B288 pin
controller. It defines the required properties, clocks, interrupts, and
provides an example node.

> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/allwinner,sun8i-b288-pinctrl.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/allwinner,sun8i-b288-pinctrl.yaml
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000000..806da97ab708a
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/allwinner,sun8i-b288-pinctrl.yaml
> @@ -0,0 +1,108 @@
> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
> +%YAML 1.2
> +---
> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/pinctrl/allwinner,sun8i-b288-pinctrl.yaml#
> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
> +
> +title: Allwinner B288 Pin Controller

[Severity: Medium]
Should this schema include an allOf block referencing the core pinctrl
schema? Omitting the core schema reference while using
additionalProperties: false below causes schema validation to reject
standard pinctrl properties (like pinctrl-names or pinctrl-0) on the
provider node.

[ ... ]

> +  interrupts:
> +    description:
> +      One interrupt per bank of external interrupt capable pins.
> +    maxItems: 4

[Severity: Low]
Could this allow device trees with incomplete interrupt configurations
(1 to 3 items) to silently pass validation? If the hardware requires
exactly 4 interrupt banks, should there be a matching minItems: 4
constraint alongside maxItems: 4?

[ ... ]

> +required:
> +  - compatible
> +  - reg
> +  - interrupts
> +  - clocks
> +  - clock-names
> +  - gpio-controller
> +  - "#gpio-cells"
> +  - interrupt-controller
> +  - "#interrupt-cells"
> +
> +additionalProperties: false

[Severity: Medium]
By setting additionalProperties: false here without defining
input-debounce in the properties block, will this prevent device trees
from configuring input debouncing? The sunxi pinctrl driver expects and
parses this property for all SoC variants with external interrupts, but
this schema will reject it.

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260923201701.43391-1-pmazzini@gmail.com?part=3