On Fri, Sep 04, 2026 at 11:03:59AM +0000, [email protected] wrote:
> Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) 
> to consider:
> - [Medium] The `memory-region` and `memory-region-names` properties for the 
> Video Protection Region (VPR) were added to the Tegra234 NVDEC binding but 
> omitted from the older NVDEC binding (`nvidia,tegra210-nvdec.yaml`) which 
> covers Tegra210, Tegra186, and Tegra194. Other hardware blocks on these older 
> chips (such as VIC and DC) already document and use `memory-region` for the 
> VPR, indicating that the hardware shares the same capability. Failing to 
> update the related YAML files in the same family causes schema validation to 
> fail for complete device trees.
> --
> 
> commit c5ee297bfa8219c2a7d714b86f0738c220914705
> Author: Thierry Reding <[email protected]>
> 
> dt-bindings: gpu: host1x: Document memory-regions for NVDEC
> 
> The video protection region is a reserved memory region that can be used
> for secure video playback. NVDEC can access this region to decode images
> into securely.
> 
> > diff --git 
> > a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpu/host1x/nvidia,tegra234-nvdec.yaml 
> > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpu/host1x/nvidia,tegra234-nvdec.yaml
> > index 4eb325cfd2961..bcaaabca945dc 100644
> > --- 
> > a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpu/host1x/nvidia,tegra234-nvdec.yaml
> > +++ 
> > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpu/host1x/nvidia,tegra234-nvdec.yaml
> > @@ -60,6 +60,14 @@ properties:
> >        - const: dma-mem
> >        - const: write
> >  
> > +  memory-region:
> > +    items:
> > +      - description: reference to the video protection memory region
> > +
> > +  memory-region-names:
> > +    items:
> > +      - const: protected
> 
> [Severity: Medium]
> Should these properties also be added to the older NVDEC binding
> (nvidia,tegra210-nvdec.yaml) which covers Tegra210, Tegra186, and Tegra194?
> 
> Other hardware blocks on these older chips (such as VIC and DC) already
> document and use memory-region for the Video Protection Region, indicating
> that the hardware shares the same capability.
> 
> If a device tree for Tegra210, Tegra186, or Tegra194 correctly specifies
> the Video Protection Region for NVDEC, will it fail schema validation
> because the properties are undocumented and additionalProperties: false
> is set in the older binding?

For the record: we'll add this to the Tegra210 NVDEC bindings in due
time. It's currently only been tested on Tegra234, hence why only that
binding is updated.

Thierry

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to