Re: [PATCH v3] dt-bindings: pinctrl: ti,pinctrl-palmas: Convert to DT schema

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Low] The device tree example fails to compile due to an unresolved phandle reference (`<&palmas_pins_state>`), and the schema incorrectly uses `additionalProperties: false` on the pinmux grouping node which rejects implicit `phandle` properties.
--

--- Patch [1]: [PATCH v3] dt-bindings: pinctrl: ti,pinctrl-palmas: Convert to DT schema ---
commit 5e382403a7463503a0f735f4070a541aa9a42807
Author: Bhargav Joshi <[email protected]>

dt-bindings: pinctrl: ti,pinctrl-palmas: Convert to DT schema

Convert TI Palmas pin control text binding to DT schema. The legacy binding
allowed any subnode name. This restricts them to standard prefixes to prevent
the validator from accidentally evaluating standard integer properties as child
nodes.

Link to v2: https://patch.msgid.link/[email protected]
Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]

> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ti,palmas-pinctrl.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ti,palmas-pinctrl.yaml
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000000..11c2d429633cb
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ti,palmas-pinctrl.yaml
> @@ -0,0 +1,170 @@
[ ... ]
> +patternProperties:
> +  '^(pinmux|pins?-[a-z0-9-]+)$':
> +    type: object
> +    additionalProperties: false

[Severity: Low]
Will this additionalProperties: false cause schema validation failures if the
node is referenced via a phandle label?

Using a label generates an implicit phandle property during dtc compilation,
which additionalProperties: false typically rejects.

[ ... ]
> +examples:
> +  - |
> +    pmic {
> +        pinctrl {
> +            compatible = "ti,tps65913-pinctrl";
> +            ti,palmas-enable-dvfs1;
> +            pinctrl-names = "default";
> +            pinctrl-0 = <&palmas_pins_state>;
> +
> +            pinmux {

[Severity: Low]
Does this example fail to compile with make dt_binding_check?

The pinctrl-0 property references &palmas_pins_state, but the
palmas_pins_state: label appears to be missing from the pinmux node here.

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/[email protected]?part=1