On 7/14/26 16:34, Rob Herring wrote:
On Mon, Jul 13, 2026 at 02:42:20PM +0000, [email protected] wrote:
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s)
to consider:
- [Medium] The compatible string `mediatek,mt6893-disp-wdma` is incorrectly
added to the standalone enum instead of the fallback items list.
--
--- Patch [9]: [PATCH v4 09/10] dt-bindings: display: mediatek: wdma: Add
compatibles for more SoCs ---
commit 8001f83833ae9c684be67bc719c7aaa056f90763
Author: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <[email protected]>
dt-bindings: display: mediatek: wdma: Add compatibles for more SoCs
Multiple MediaTek SoCs have the Write DMA hardware in their Display
Controller. This commit adds the missing compatibles for Dimensity 1200
(MT6893) and for Kompanio 500/520/820/1200.
diff --git
a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/mediatek/mediatek,wdma.yaml
b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/mediatek/mediatek,wdma.yaml
index 97d052b0fb614..c3ed867d058d9 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/mediatek/mediatek,wdma.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/mediatek/mediatek,wdma.yaml
@@ -22,11 +22,16 @@ properties:
compatible:
oneOf:
- enum:
+ - mediatek,mt6893-disp-wdma
[Severity: Medium]
Does this incorrectly place mediatek,mt6893-disp-wdma as a standalone
compatible string rather than in the items list requiring a fallback?
If a device tree uses compatible = "mediatek,mt6893-disp-wdma" to satisfy
this schema, the DRM driver will not probe the device since it only matches
mediatek,mt8173-disp-wdma. If the developer instead provides the fallback
compatible = "mediatek,mt6893-disp-wdma", "mediatek,mt8173-disp-wdma" so the
driver can probe it, won't the device tree fail schema validation here?
Sashiko fails to look at patch 10. However, the commit message gives no
clue whether mt6893 is or is not compatible with something else. If not
compatible, explain why it isn't. What's different?
Eh, MT6893 supports 64-bits image data destination address (has two registers,
lower 32 bits and upper 32 bits), while MT8173 and others supports 32-bits only.
Should I resend with an improved commit message, or would it be fine to change
that while applying?
Multiple MediaTek SoCs have the Write DMA hardware in their Display
Controller. This commit adds the missing compatibles for Dimensity 1200
(MT6893), supporting image destination address of up to 64 bits, and for
Kompanio 500/520/820/1200, fully compatible with MT8173, supporting only
32 bits.
Cheers,
Angelo
