[PATCH v10 1/3] dt-bindings: dma: Add Amlogic A9 SoC DMA

[sashiko-bot at kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Low] The macros DMA_TX and DMA_RX in the global devicetree bindings header lack an SoC or vendor prefix, causing namespace pollution.
--

--- Patch [1]: [PATCH v10 1/3] dt-bindings: dma: Add Amlogic A9 SoC DMA ---
commit dd68c09cf89a4142756eff7b44b06fb8f8ed1b20
Author: Xianwei Zhao <xianwei.zhao at amlogic.com>

dt-bindings: dma: Add Amlogic A9 SoC DMA

This commit adds documentation describing the Amlogic A9 SoC DMA controller.
It also introduces a new include file containing specific property values
for DMA channels.

[ ... ]

> diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/dma/amlogic,a9-dma.h b/include/dt-bindings/dma/amlogic,a9-dma.h
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000000..c59c2fd4b9561
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/include/dt-bindings/dma/amlogic,a9-dma.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR MIT) */
> +
> +#ifndef __DT_BINDINGS_DMA_AMLOGIC_DMA_H__
> +#define __DT_BINDINGS_DMA_AMLOGIC_DMA_H__
> +
> +#define DMA_TX			0
> +#define DMA_RX			1

[Severity: Low]
Do these macro names need a vendor or SoC prefix like AMLOGIC_A9_DMA_TX?

Since they are in a global devicetree bindings header, using generic names
like DMA_TX and DMA_RX could pollute the global macro namespace. Are these
likely to collide with existing definitions in other driver headers and
cause macro redefinition build errors?

> +#endif /* __DT_BINDINGS_DMA_AMLOGIC_DMA_H__ */

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260710-amlogic-dma-v10-0-ff4deae837e7@amlogic.com?part=1