Re: [PATCH RESEND v6 1/5] mfd: axp20x: Constify axp313 and axp717 cells

On sam. 12 janv. 2008 at 23:37, [email protected] wrote:

> Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
>
> Pre-existing issues:
> - [Medium] Hard-coded cell IDs are used in `axp806_cells` and
> `axp809_cells` instead of leveraging `platform_device->id` or
> `PLATFORM_DEVID_AUTO`, violating MFD subsystem guidelines.
> --
>
> --- Patch [1]: [PATCH RESEND v6 1/5] mfd: axp20x: Constify axp313 and axp717 cells ---
> commit d0271b0bfb6609a5dbfc9c713361a49994e56202
> Author: Jerome Brunet <[email protected]>
>
> mfd: axp20x: Constify axp313 and axp717 cells
>
> This commit constifies the mfd_cells arrays for the axp313 and axp717 chips.
> It aligns their declarations with the rest of the supported chips where
> the arrays are properly marked as const.

As expected and already explained in the cover-letter.

>
>> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/axp20x.c b/drivers/mfd/axp20x.c
>> index 679364189ea58..22baab6e10fa6 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mfd/axp20x.c
>> +++ b/drivers/mfd/axp20x.c
>
> [ ... ]
>
>> static const struct mfd_cell axp806_cells[] = {
>> 	{
>> 		.id		= 2,
>> 		.name		= "axp20x-regulator",
>> 	},
>> };
>> 
>> static const struct mfd_cell axp809_cells[] = {
>> 	{
>> 		.name		= "axp20x-gpio",
>> 		.of_compatible	= "x-powers,axp221-gpio",
>> 	}, {
>> 		.name		= "axp221-pek",
>> 		.num_resources	= ARRAY_SIZE(axp809_pek_resources),
>> 		.resources	= axp809_pek_resources,
>> 	}, {
>> 		.id		= 1,
>> 		.name		= "axp20x-regulator",
>> 	},
>> };
>
> [Severity: Medium]
> This is a pre-existing issue, but is it safe to use hard-coded cell IDs
> like 1 and 2 for the axp20x-regulator cells in the axp806_cells and
> axp809_cells arrays?
>
> The MFD subsystem guidelines require using PLATFORM_DEVID_AUTO for automatic
> cell indexing, or platform_device->id if numbering is explicitly needed.
>
> Can this hard-coded cell ID usage lead to device naming collisions in sysfs
> or driver load failures?

-- 
Jerome