Re: [PATCH 1/6] dt-bindings: rtc: abx80x: document ABX81X RTCs

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Low] The newly added SPI compatible strings `abracon,ab0815` and `abracon,ab1815` were omitted from the `if-then` conditional block that restricts trickle charger properties.
- [Low] The schema explicitly introduces SPI support but fails to reference the standard SPI peripheral properties schema, causing common SPI properties to be rejected.
--

--- Patch [1]: [PATCH 1/6] dt-bindings: rtc: abx80x: document ABX81X RTCs ---
commit 74ad54b7ffcb981494fb52031a1edb5415b809ae
Author: Antoni Pokusinski <[email protected]>

dt-bindings: rtc: abx80x: document ABX81X RTCs

Abracon AB0815 and AB1815 are RTC modules with SPI interface.

> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/abracon,abx80x.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/abracon,abx80x.yaml
> index 355b0598411a6..234a103724b56 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/abracon,abx80x.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/abracon,abx80x.yaml
[ ... ]
> @@ -21,10 +21,12 @@ properties:
>        - abracon,ab0803
>        - abracon,ab0804
>        - abracon,ab0805
> +      - abracon,ab0815
>        - abracon,ab1801
>        - abracon,ab1803
>        - abracon,ab1804
>        - abracon,ab1805
> +      - abracon,ab1815
>        - microcrystal,rv1805

[Severity: Low]
Will the schema validator reject standard trickle charger properties for the
newly added AB0815 and AB1815 compatible strings?

Looking at the conditional block later in the file:

allOf:
  - $ref: rtc.yaml#
  - if:
      properties:
        compatible:
          not:
            contains:
              enum:
                - abracon,abx80x
                - abracon,ab0804
                - abracon,ab1804
                - abracon,ab0805
                - abracon,ab1805

Because abracon,ab0815 and abracon,ab1815 were omitted from this enum list,
abracon,tc-diode and abracon,tc-resistor will evaluate to false for these
variants. Should they be added to the list?

[ ... ]
> @@ -96,3 +98,14 @@ examples:
>              interrupts = <44 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_FALLING>;
>          };
>      };
> +
> +  - |
> +    spi {
> +        #address-cells = <1>;
> +        #size-cells = <0>;
> +
> +        rtc@0 {
> +            compatible = "abracon,ab1815";
> +            reg = <0>;
> +        };
> +    };

[Severity: Low]
Does this binding need to reference the standard SPI peripheral properties?

Because the schema adds SPI support and specifies unevaluatedProperties: false,
standard SPI properties like spi-max-frequency will be rejected by the
validator.

Could a reference to /schemas/spi/spi-peripheral-props.yaml# be added to the
allOf block to permit these common SPI properties?

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