[PATCH v2 0/3] Add and enable USB nodes for ExynosAutov920 SoC

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 23/01/2026 07:23, Pritam Manohar Sutar wrote:
> 
> Apologize for any inconvenience caused by the issues you’ve identified. 
> Below, Have outlined the changes, will implement to address the warnings 
> and ensure the patch set aligns with the required standards.
> 
> Proposed Changes:
> 1. Will include #phy-cells = <0>; in the USB PHY nodes 
>   (usb_phy0, usb_phy1, usb_phy2, and usb_phy3) 
> This is a crucial addition to avoid compilation warnings and ensure compatibility.
> 
> Example:
> usb_phy0: usb-phy0 {    
>     compatible = "usb-nop-xceiv";    
>     #phy-cells = <0>;    
>     vbus-supply = <&usbdrd31_dwc3_vbus>;    
> };    
> 
> 2. The errors were not caught by the make dt_binding_check and make dtbs_check 
>   commands 
>   make -j ARCH=arm64 dt_binding_check dtbs_check DT_SCHEMA_FILES=Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/samsung,usb3-drd-phy.yaml
>   make -j ARCH=arm64 dt_binding_check dtbs_check DT_SCHEMA_FILES=Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/samsung,exynos-dwc3.yaml
> 
> 3. Once the above changes are verified and tested, I will incorporate them into the
>   next version of the patch set (v3).
> 
> Questions:
> 1. Are the Proposed Changes Correct?
>   Please confirm if the inclusion of #phy-cells = <0>; in the USB PHY nodes is the correct 
>   fix for the issue. If there are additional changes required, kindly let me know.
> 
> 2. Why Warnings Were Not Captured During Initial Checks?
>   The make dt_binding_check and make dtbs_check commands did not flag the warnings,
>   which suggests the schema or bindings might not be comprehensive enough. Could you 
>   provide insights or recommendations on how to improve the schema to catch such issues
>   in the future?

Please explain, why are we talking through microslop ChatGPT?


Best regards,
Krzysztof