Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: watchdog: samsung-wdt: Add exynos5515-wdt compatible

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] The dt-binding fails to explicitly forbid the `samsung,cluster-index` property for `samsung,exynos5515-wdt`, contradicting the commit message.
--

--- Patch [1]: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: watchdog: samsung-wdt: Add exynos5515-wdt compatible ---
commit 63eda32b0d2c9ec15d915ccf3b6c34aae569838f
Author: Aiden Isik <aidenisik@member.fsf.org>

dt-bindings: watchdog: samsung-wdt: Add exynos5515-wdt compatible

This commit adds a device tree binding compatible string for the Exynos5515
watchdog timer. It requires a syscon phandle and specifies that the cluster
index should not be used since the SoC has a single core cluster.

> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/samsung-wdt.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/samsung-wdt.yaml
> index 41aee1655b0c2..9e754404848b9 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/samsung-wdt.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/samsung-wdt.yaml
[ ... ]
> @@ -93,6 +94,25 @@ allOf:
>          - samsung,cluster-index
>          - samsung,syscon-phandle
>  
> +  - if:
> +      properties:
> +        compatible:
> +          contains:
> +            enum:
> +              - samsung,exynos5515-wdt
> +    then:
> +      properties:
> +        clocks:
> +          items:
> +            - description: Bus clock, used for register interface
> +            - description: Source clock (driving watchdog counter)
> +        clock-names:
> +          items:
> +            - const: watchdog
> +            - const: watchdog_src
> +      required:
> +        - samsung,syscon-phandle

[Severity: Medium]
The commit message mentions that the cluster index should not be specified
for this SoC. In the allOf conditional block for samsung,exynos5515-wdt,
does this need to explicitly forbid the property by adding
samsung,cluster-index: false under the properties section?

Without this constraint, will dt_binding_check silently allow device trees
for Exynos5515 that erroneously include the samsung,cluster-index property,
since it is defined in the top-level properties block and thus valid under
unevaluatedProperties: false?

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260817-for-next-lucky7-watchdog-v1-0-a14370e20b92@member.fsf.org?part=1