Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Low] The compatible string used in the example does not match any of the allowed compatible strings defined in the schema enum.
--
--- Patch [1]: [PATCH 1/8] dt-bindings: phy: Document ST STM32MP25 USB2-FEMTO PHY ---
commit 30374f65d955f737e83c81bfd3daa6123e05bf6b
Author: Pankaj Dev <[email protected]>
dt-bindings: phy: Document ST STM32MP25 USB2-FEMTO PHY
This commit documents the USB2 PHY for STM32MP25 USB2 controllers. It
introduces bindings for two slightly different PHYs on the SoC, using
different compatible strings to discern them.
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/st,stm32-usb2phy.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/st,stm32-usb2phy.yaml
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000000..ca9fc3b87383c
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/st,stm32-usb2phy.yaml
[ ... ]
> +properties:
> + compatible:
> + enum:
> + - st,stm32mp25-usb2phy1
> + - st,stm32mp25-usb2phy2
> +
[ ... ]
> +examples:
> + - |
> + #include <dt-bindings/clock/st,stm32mp25-rcc.h>
> + #include <dt-bindings/reset/st,stm32mp25-rcc.h>
> +
> + usb2_phy2: usb-phy {
> + compatible = "st,stm32mp25-usb2phy";
[Severity: Low]
Does this compatible string match the ones defined in the schema properties?
Looking at the enum above, the schema defines st,stm32mp25-usb2phy1 and
st,stm32mp25-usb2phy2, but the example uses st,stm32mp25-usb2phy. Will
this cause dt_binding_check to fail when validating the example block against
the schema definitions?
> + #clock-cells = <0>;
> + #phy-cells = <0>;
[ ... ]
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/[email protected]?part=1
--
linux-phy mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-phy
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.