Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 3 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] The display driver unconditionally requests the `vdd` supply, causing probe warnings and unnecessary reliance on dummy regulators when `vdd-supply` is omitted in the device tree.
- [Low] Relaxation of schema constraints for the original `visionox,vtdr6130` compatible string by dropping `vdd-supply` globally instead of using a conditional block.
- [Low] The new vendor prefix `retroidpocket` is undocumented.
--
--- Patch [1]: [PATCH 1/4] dt-bindings: display: visionox,vtdr6130: Add Retroid Pocket 6 panel ---
commit f69298db59942a4fe08895f95f545561dd02eb42
Author: Aaron Kling <[email protected]>
dt-bindings: display: visionox,vtdr6130: Add Retroid Pocket 6 panel
The vtdr6130 is a display driver integrated circuit, a common chip used
for various panels. One such panel is used in the Retroid Pocket 6. The
RP6 panel only lists the regulators vddio and vci, so drop vdd as a
required property.
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/panel/visionox,vtdr6130.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/panel/visionox,vtdr6130.yaml
> index c99f4146f1bb0..682f30dc9ee43 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/panel/visionox,vtdr6130.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/panel/visionox,vtdr6130.yaml
> @@ -14,7 +14,11 @@ allOf:
>
> properties:
> compatible:
> - const: visionox,vtdr6130
> + oneOf:
> + - const: visionox,vtdr6130
> + - items:
> + - const: retroidpocket,rp6-panel
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
[Severity: Low]
Is the retroidpocket vendor prefix documented in the vendor-prefixes schema?
If it is not recognized, dt_binding_check will output a warning or error.
> + - const: visionox,vtdr6130
>
> reg:
> maxItems: 1
[ ... ]
> @@ -25,13 +29,13 @@ properties:
> vdd-supply: true
> port: true
> reset-gpios: true
> + rotation: true
>
> required:
> - compatible
> - reg
> - vddio-supply
> - vci-supply
> - - vdd-supply
^^^^^^^^^^^^
[Severity: Low]
Does dropping vdd-supply globally allow invalid device trees for the original
visionox,vtdr6130 compatible to pass validation if they omit this property?
Could this be handled using an allOf if/then conditional block that keeps
vdd-supply required for visionox,vtdr6130 but optional for the new variant?
[Severity: Medium]
Will the driver unconditionally request the vdd supply, even when it is omitted
for the retroidpocket,rp6-panel variant?
Looking at visionox_vtdr6130_probe() in panel-visionox-vtdr6130.c:
ret = devm_regulator_bulk_get_const(&dsi->dev,
ARRAY_SIZE(visionox_vtdr6130_supplies),
visionox_vtdr6130_supplies,
&ctx->supplies);
Since visionox_vtdr6130_supplies includes vdd, might this cause the driver to
trigger a kernel warning during boot and unnecessarily rely on the regulator
framework dummy fallback when the supply is missing?
> - reset-gpios
> - port
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260814-rp6-panel-v1-0-111c1aeccf0f-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org?part=1
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not
affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for
the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.