Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider: - [Medium] The `allOf` conditional block restricts the `ldb` child node exclusively to `nxp,imx94-lvds-csr`, improperly forbidding it for `nxp,imx95-lvds-csr`. --
commit 6a3665e114245286584773223a39379615a4d4fc Author: Laurentiu Palcu <[email protected]> dt-bindings: clock: nxp,imx95-blk-ctl: Add ldb child node This commit adds support for the 'ldb' child node to the i.MX95 BLK CTL bindings. It updates the schema to handle cases where BLK CTL registers control the LVDS Display Bridge controllers. > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/nxp,imx95-blk-ctl.yaml > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/nxp,imx95-blk-ctl.yaml > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/nxp,imx95-blk-ctl.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/nxp,imx95-blk-ctl.yaml [ ... ] > @@ -46,6 +57,21 @@ required: > - power-domains > - clocks > > +allOf: > + - if: > + not: > + properties: > + compatible: > + contains: > + const: nxp,imx94-lvds-csr [Severity: Medium] Does this restriction improperly forbid the ldb child node on i.MX95 devices? The clock driver exposes LDB-related clocks for the i.MX95 variant, so it seems nxp,imx95-lvds-csr is also an LVDS CSR that controls the LVDS Display Bridge. By omitting nxp,imx95-lvds-csr from this check, will valid i.MX95 device trees defining the ldb child node fail schema validation? Should this condition check an enum containing both nxp,imx94-lvds-csr and nxp,imx95-lvds-csr instead? > + then: > + patternProperties: > + "^ldb@[0-9a-f]+$": false > + else: > + required: > + - '#address-cells' > + - '#size-cells' -- Sashiko AI review ยท https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/[email protected]?part=6
