* Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] dt-bindings: hwmon: Add starfive,jhb100-fan-tach
[not found] ` <20260428193953.31ED7C2BCAF@smtp.kernel.org>
@ 2026-05-06 1:22 ` Rob Herring
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Rob Herring @ 2026-05-06 1:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: sashiko; +Cc: Changhuang Liang, linux-hwmon
On Tue, Apr 28, 2026 at 07:39:52PM +0000, sashiko-bot@kernel.org wrote:
> Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
> - [Low] The `tach-ch` property in the device tree example uses incorrect comma-separated syntax that evaluates to a 5-byte array rather than the intended 2-byte array.
> --
>
> commit 4bf196984d444742e611042f289ee38d6b5ced8c
> Author: Changhuang Liang <changhuang.liang@starfivetech.com>
>
> dt-bindings: hwmon: Add starfive,jhb100-fan-tach
>
> This commit adds the compatible string "starfive,jhb100-fan-tach" and the
> corresponding binding schema for the StarFive JHB100 Fan-Tach controller.
> The controller supports up to 16 fan tach inputs.
>
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/hwmon/starfive,jhb100-fan-tach.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/hwmon/starfive,jhb100-fan-tach.yaml
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/hwmon/starfive,jhb100-fan-tach.yaml
> [ ... ]
> > +examples:
> > + - |
> > + fan-tach-controller@11be0000 {
> > + compatible = "starfive,jhb100-fan-tach";
> > + reg = <0x11be0000 0x400>;
> > + interrupts = <128>;
> > + clocks = <&per2crg 33>;
> > + resets = <&per2crg 5>;
> > + #address-cells = <1>;
> > + #size-cells = <0>;
> > +
> > + fan@0 {
> > + reg = <0>;
> > + tach-ch = /bits/ 8 <0x0>, <0x8>;
>
> Is the comma-separated syntax in tach-ch intentional? In Device Tree Source
> syntax, the /bits/ 8 directive applies only to the immediately following
> angle-bracket block.
>
> Because tach-ch = /bits/ 8 <0x0>, <0x8>; separates the values with a comma,
> the second block reverts to the default 32-bit cell size. This produces a
> 5-byte array [0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x08] rather than the intended 2-byte
> array.
>
> If a developer copies this example into a real device tree, will the driver
> incorrectly interpret it as 5 separate tachometer channels (0, 0, 0, 0, 8)
> instead of the intended 2 channels (0, 8)?
>
> Should this be written as /bits/ 8 <0x0 0x8>; or using byte array syntax
> like [00 08] instead?
Yes. The former style though.
Rob
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread