Re: [PATCH v24 04/12] mfd: psci-mfd: Add PSCI MFD driver for cpuidle-psci-domain cell

On 8/12/2026 1:45 PM, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Mon, 03 Aug 2026, [email protected] wrote:
> 
>> Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
>> - [Medium] The new `psci-mfd` driver lacks a `.remove` callback and does not set `.suppress_bind_attrs = true`, allowing manual unbinding via sysfs which leads to resource leaks.
>> - [Low] The newly introduced MFD driver, its file, and its structures include the string 'mfd' in their names, violating subsystem conventions.
> 
> Please review, explain or fix the Sashiko review(s).
> 
> If this is a set, this request includes the other patches too.

Already replied to Sashiko's review comments on other patches.

> 
>> --
>>
>> --- Patch [4]: [PATCH v24 04/12] mfd: psci-mfd: Add PSCI MFD driver for cpuidle-psci-domain cell ---
>> commit 26907aee3ff3e0a5d7112a9be25ebbebb10e94c7
>> Author: Shivendra Pratap <[email protected]>
>>
>> mfd: psci-mfd: Add PSCI MFD driver for cpuidle-psci-domain cell
>>
>> This commit introduces a new PSCI MFD driver to manage multiple consumers of
>> the PSCI device node. It registers the cpuidle-psci-domain as a child cell
>> and updates the cpuidle driver to probe as an MFD child.
>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/psci-mfd.c b/drivers/mfd/psci-mfd.c
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 0000000000000..7affd6bb09dd8
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/drivers/mfd/psci-mfd.c
>> [ ... ]
>>> +static struct platform_driver psci_mfd_driver = {
>>> +	.probe = psci_mfd_probe,
>>> +	.driver = {
>>> +		.name = "psci-mfd",
>>
>> [Severity: Low]
>> This isn't a bug, but does naming the driver and struct with the "mfd"
>> string violate the MFD subsystem guidelines?

sure. will remove the string "mfd" as per guidelines.

>>
>> The MFD guidelines state not to hard-code implementation details in driver,
>> struct, or device names, and to specifically avoid including the string
>> "mfd" or the driver's own filename in names.
>>
>> [Severity: Medium]
>> Since there is no .remove callback provided in psci_mfd_driver, does this
>> allow manual sysfs unbinding that could leak resources?
>>
>> If a user unbinds the driver via sysfs, devres will destroy the child
>> devices. Because the child driver (psci-cpuidle-domain) lacks proper
>> cleanup for non-devm resources like generic PM domains, those resources
>> might leak or leave dangling pointers on this administrative path.
>>
>> Should .suppress_bind_attrs = true be set in the driver struct to prevent
>> unsupported sysfs unbinding?

Ack. will set .suppress_bind_attrs = true. for psci-mfd and 
cpuidle-psci-domain.

thanks,
Shivendra