Re: [PATCH v2 3/9] dt-bindings: usb: generic-ehci: Document access-controllers property
| Newsgroups | org.infradead.lists.linux-phy,org.kernel.vger.linux-devicetree |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider: - [Medium] The patch adds the `access-controllers` property to `generic-ehci.yaml` but fails to update the companion `generic-ohci.yaml` binding schema. -- --- Patch [3]: [PATCH v2 3/9] dt-bindings: usb: generic-ehci: Document access-controllers property --- commit 53582485218bdac0220f3acaf5124a6d9549f7b3 Author: Marek Vasut <[email protected]> dt-bindings: usb: generic-ehci: Document access-controllers property This commit updates the generic EHCI device tree binding to document the access-controllers property for controllers that require access checks. > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/generic-ehci.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/generic-ehci.yaml > index 55a5aa7d7a54e..602241887d995 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/generic-ehci.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/generic-ehci.yaml > @@ -80,6 +80,9 @@ properties: > minItems: 1 > maxItems: 2 > > + access-controllers: > + maxItems: 1 > + [Severity: Medium] Should Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/generic-ohci.yaml also be updated symmetrically? When access-controllers are configured for the companion OHCI controller in the device tree (such as on STMicroelectronics SoCs where EHCI and OHCI operate as firewalled companions), wouldn't the dt_binding_check validation fail since generic-ohci.yaml enforces unevaluatedProperties: false? -- Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/[email protected]?part=3 -- linux-phy mailing list [email protected] https://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-phy