Re: [PATCH v4 1/6] dt-bindings: rtc: Add pinctrl for S35390A

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Low] Invalid use of the `wakeup-parent` property on an RTC end-device.
--

--- Patch [1]: [PATCH v4 1/6] dt-bindings: rtc: Add pinctrl for S35390A ---
commit 58cc609a743d62ad0839cf063b2bd4bf9603a2d0
Author: Markus Probst <[email protected]>
Subject: dt-bindings: rtc: Add pinctrl for S35390A

This commit converts the devicetree bindings for the S-35390A RTC into a
standalone YAML schema. It also adds properties to configure individual pins
via pinctrl to allow the interrupt signal 1 to be used for wakeup alarms.

> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/sii,s35390a.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/sii,s35390a.yaml
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000000..d9da3abbbd518
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/sii,s35390a.yaml

[ ... ]

> +  interrupts:
> +    minItems: 1
> +    maxItems: 2
> +    description: Supports up to 2 interrupt lines via the INT1 and INT2 pins.
> +
> +  wakeup-parent: true
> +
> +  wakeup-source: true

[Severity: Low]
Is wakeup-parent appropriate for this device? The wakeup-parent property is
typically defined strictly for cascaded interrupt controllers to specify an
upstream wakeup-capable interrupt controller. Since this is an end device,
should it only use the wakeup-source boolean instead?

[ ... ]

> +examples:
> +  - |
> +    i2c {
> +        #address-cells = <1>;
> +        #size-cells = <0>;
> +
> +        rtc@30 {
> +            compatible = "sii,s35390a";
> +            reg = <0x30>;
> +            pinctrl-0 = <&rtc_pins_default>;
> +            pinctrl-names = "default";
> +
> +            wakeup-parent = <&int>;

[Severity: Low]
Should this example be updated to remove the wakeup-parent assignment,
assuming the property is dropped from the schema above?

[ ... ]

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