Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] nvmem: uniphier-efuse: Enable for K3 SoCs
From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
Date: 2026-09-10 16:06:19
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider: - [Medium] Kconfig tristate allows module build, violating the "must be builtin" requirement - [Medium] Initcall ordering mismatch defeats the early probe requirement -- commit bf414bd455e78f29d0ed967ddc65ad76226003fc Author: Judith Mendez [off-list ref] nvmem: uniphier-efuse: Enable for K3 SoCs This commit adds an ARCH_K3 dependency and sets the uniphier-efuse driver to default to y for K3 architectures. It intends to ensure the driver is built-in to support early probe of the k3-socinfo driver.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff --git a/drivers/nvmem/Kconfig b/drivers/nvmem/Kconfig index 283134498fbc3..192e9617ec472 100644 --- a/drivers/nvmem/Kconfig +++ b/drivers/nvmem/Kconfig@@ -376,8 +376,9 @@ config NVMEM_U_BOOT_ENV config NVMEM_UNIPHIER_EFUSE tristate "UniPhier SoCs eFuse support" - depends on ARCH_UNIPHIER || COMPILE_TEST + depends on ARCH_UNIPHIER || ARCH_K3 || COMPILE_TEST depends on HAS_IOMEM + default y if ARCH_K3
[Severity: Medium]
The commit message states the uniphier-efuse driver must be builtin to support
early probe of k3-socinfo during boot. Does default y actually prevent the
symbol from being configured as a module (m) when ARCH_K3 is selected?
If a user configures NVMEM_UNIPHIER_EFUSE=m, the driver will not be available
during early boot. To enforce a built-in requirement for K3 while allowing
modules on other architectures, should this use a dependency like
depends on !(ARCH_K3 && m)?
[Severity: Medium]
Even if the driver is strictly built-in, will the uniphier-efuse provider probe
early enough for the k3-socinfo consumer?
Looking at how the uniphier-efuse driver is registered:
drivers/nvmem/uniphier-efuse.c:
module_platform_driver(uniphier_efuse_driver);
This expands to device_initcall.
However, the consumer registers earlier:
drivers/soc/ti/k3-socinfo.c:
subsys_initcall(k3_chipinfo_init);
Since device_initcall executes after subsys_initcall when built-in, won't
this force the consumer to defer its probe? Should the uniphier-efuse driver
use an earlier initcall?
help This is a simple driver to dump specified values of UniPhier SoC from eFuse.
-- Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260910155509.1425682-1-jm@ti.com?part=2