Re: Re: [PATCH v14 2/5] dt-bindings: pwm: dwc: Add eswin compatible
"Xuyang Dong" <[email protected]> Fri, 31 Jul 2026 14:41:00 +0800 (GMT+08:00)
| Newsgroups | dev.linux.lists.sashiko-reviews,org.kernel.vger.linux-devicetree,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-pwm |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
> > Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider: > - [Medium] The conditional schema for `eswin,eic7700-pwm` fails to constrain the `resets` property to a maximum of 1 item. > -- > > --- Patch [2]: [PATCH v14 2/5] dt-bindings: pwm: dwc: Add eswin compatible --- > commit 804c34afffe86d4a3ff253201b6470e700f1af47 > Author: Xuyang Dong <[email protected]> > > dt-bindings: pwm: dwc: Add eswin compatible > > This commit adds the eswin,eic7700-pwm compatible string to the > snps,dw-apb-timers-pwm2 binding. The EIC7700 integrates this IP but requires > exactly one combined reset line instead of up to two independent lines. > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/snps,dw-apb-timers-pwm2.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/snps,dw-apb-timers-pwm2.yaml > > index 1f9d72f9f3590..87a56ffed09d9 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/snps,dw-apb-timers-pwm2.yaml > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/snps,dw-apb-timers-pwm2.yaml > [ ... ] > > @@ -64,6 +64,29 @@ required: > > - clocks > > - clock-names > > > > +allOf: > > + - $ref: pwm.yaml# > > + > > + - if: > > + properties: > > + compatible: > > + contains: > > + const: eswin,eic7700-pwm > > + then: > > + properties: > > + resets: > > + items: > > + - description: Combined APB interface and timer logic reset > > [Severity: Medium] > Is it possible for a device tree to pass validation with two resets for this > compatible, despite the intention in the commit message? > Hi Sashiko, Because we added an example for one reset. If you add two resets for eswin,eic7700-pwm in a device tree, running "make dtbs_check" will report that the resets property is too long. > Because the top-level resets property implicitly allows up to 2 items, > overriding the items list here with a single element doesn't automatically > reduce the maximum allowed items. > > Should maxItems: 1 be added explicitly in this block alongside items? > If we add "maxItems: 1", running "make dt_binding_check" will report that maxItems is not needed when an items list is already present. Best regards, Xuyang Dong > -- > Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/[email protected]?part=2