Re: [PATCH 1/3] [v5 net-next] dt-bindings: net: add st,stlc4560/p54spi binding

Conor Dooley <[email protected]> writes:

> On Fri, May 08, 2026 at 09:32:54PM +0000, [email protected] wrote:
>> Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
>> - [Low] Typo in the binding description: 'STLC5460' is used instead of 'STLC4560'.
>> - [Low] The `interrupts-extended` and `powerdown-gpios` specifiers in the example lack standard secondary cells (flags/triggers).
>> --
>> 
>> commit b803e7cb976e6f9f5ea1b9d2c76cdffbb8fe0d67
>> Author: Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]>
>> 
>> dt-bindings: net: add st,stlc4560/p54spi binding
>> 
>> This commit adds a device tree binding for the SPI version of the Prism54
>> wireless device. It documents the known names of this device and the
>> properties sufficient for its use.
>> 
>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
>> 
>> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/st,stlc4560.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/st,stlc4560.yaml
>> > new file mode 100644
>> > index 0000000000000..a32265c07350d
>> > --- /dev/null
>> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/st,stlc4560.yaml
>> > @@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
>> > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
>> > +%YAML 1.2
>> > +---
>> > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/net/wireless/st,stlc4560.yaml#
>> > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
>> > +
>> > +title: ST/Intersil/Conexant stlc45xx/p54spi/cx3110x SPI wireless device
>> > +
>> > +maintainers:
>> > +  - Christian Lamparter <[email protected]>
>> > +
>> > +description:
>> > +  The SPI variant of the Intersil Prism54 wireless device was sold
>> > +  under a variety of names, including Conexant CX3110x and
>> > +  ST Microelectronics STLC5460.
>> 
>> This isn't a bug, but there's a typo in the description (STLC5460 instead
>> of STLC4560).
>> 
>> [ ... ]
>> 
>> > +examples:
>> > +  - |
>> > +    spi {
>> > +        #address-cells = <1>;
>> > +        #size-cells = <0>;
>> > +
>> > +        wifi@0 {
>> > +            compatible = "st,stlc4560";
>> > +            reg = <0>;
>> > +            spi-max-frequency = <48000000>;
>> > +            interrupts-extended = <&gpio 23>;
>> > +            powerdown-gpios = <&gpio 1>;
>> 
>> Do these specifiers need standard secondary cells for flags and triggers?
>> 
>> Real-world GPIO controllers typically require #gpio-cells = <2> or
>> #interrupt-cells = <2> to specify trigger types and active levels. While
>> dt_binding_check accepts this since the phandle cell sizes are unknown,
>> copying this example into a real device tree will result in a compilation
>> error.
>
> Can we make this thing not whinge about stuff like this? It's an
> /example/ and these fields cannot be copy-pasted anyway.

If you have an idea how to convert it into a rule, I'm happy to merge it
into prompts. Something like "fields X and Y are not required for
example dt records". Sorry, it's really far from my area of expertise, so
I don't know what's right here and what's not.

Thanks!