Re: [PATCH v9 34/36] dt-bindings: pinctrl: airoha: add support of en7523 pin controller

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 4 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] The 'airoha,chip-scu' property is used by the pinctrl driver but is missing from the device tree binding schema.
- [Low] Duplicate dictionary key 'gpio-ranges' in the schema properties section.
- [Low] The device tree example uses an unresolved phandle '&pinctrl' for the 'gpio-ranges' property.
- [Low] The example incorrectly assigns a deprecated integer value to the boolean property 'drive-open-drain'.
--

--- Patch [34]: [PATCH v9 34/36] dt-bindings: pinctrl: airoha: add support of en7523 pin controller ---
commit 798edf223c3bff7c2f675ccb0cf54fc3993ff782
Author: Mikhail Kshevetskiy <[email protected]>

dt-bindings: pinctrl: airoha: add support of en7523 pin controller

This patch adds device tree binding schema for Airoha EN7523 SoC pin
controller.

> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/airoha,en7523-pinctrl.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/airoha,en7523-pinctrl.yaml
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000000..dd5b3b51f7694
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/airoha,en7523-pinctrl.yaml
> @@ -0,0 +1,379 @@
> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR BSD-2-Clause)
> +%YAML 1.2
> +---
> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/pinctrl/airoha,en7523-pinctrl.yaml#
> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
> +
> +title: Airoha EN7523 Pin Controller
> +
> +maintainers:
> +  - Lorenzo Bianconi <[email protected]>
> +
> +description:
> +  The Airoha's EN7523 Pin controller is used to control SoC pins.
> +
> +properties:
> +  compatible:
> +    const: airoha,en7523-pinctrl
> +
> +  interrupts:
> +    maxItems: 1

[Severity: Medium]
The pinctrl driver expects an airoha,chip-scu property to supply a phandle 
to the SCU, but it is missing from this schema. Since this binding enforces 
additionalProperties: false, will device trees that legitimately provide this 
property fail validation?

> +
> +  gpio-controller: true
> +  gpio-ranges: true
> +
> +  '#gpio-cells':
> +    const: 2
> +
> +  gpio-ranges:
> +    maxItems: 1

[Severity: Low]
Is it intentional to define the gpio-ranges key twice in this section? 
Strict YAML parsers will reject this duplicate key, causing 
make dt_binding_check to fail to load the file.

[ ... ]

> +examples:
> +  - |
> +    #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/arm-gic.h>
> +
> +    pinctrl {
> +      compatible = "airoha,en7523-pinctrl";
> +
> +      interrupt-parent = <&gic>;
> +      interrupts = <GIC_SPI 26 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
> +
> +      gpio-controller;
> +      #gpio-cells = <2>;
> +
> +      interrupt-controller;
> +      #interrupt-cells = <2>;
> +
> +      gpio-ranges = <&pinctrl 0 12 30>;

[Severity: Low]
Since the root node is defined as pinctrl without a label, the reference 
<&pinctrl 0 12 30> is unresolved. Could this cause the dtc compiler to fail 
with a reference to non-existent node or label error during schema checks?

> +
> +      pcie1-rst-pins {
> +        conf {
> +          pins = "pcie_reset1";
> +          drive-open-drain = <1>;

[Severity: Low]
Does this example use deprecated syntax by assigning an integer <1> to 
drive-open-drain? The standard pincfg-node.yaml schema expects this to 
be a boolean flag.

> +        };
> +      };

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/[email protected]?part=34