[Linux-stm32] [PATCH 1/1] tty: serial: use dmaengine_desc_set_callback()

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Thu, Nov 05, 2026 at 04:36:38PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 05, 2026 at 04:17:53PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 05, 2026 at 01:28:46PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 02, 2026 at 12:54:48PM -0500, Frank.Li at oss.nxp.com wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > Replace open-coded assignments to callback and callback_param fields
> > > > of struct dma_async_tx_descriptor with calls to the
> > > > dmaengine_desc_set_callback() helper across serial drivers.
> > > > 
> > > > No functional change intended. Prepare to make struct
> > > > dma_async_tx_descriptor private to the DMA engine.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li at nxp.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_dma.c  | 6 ++----
> > > >  drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_mtk.c  | 3 +--
> > > >  drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_omap.c | 6 ++----
> > > >  drivers/tty/serial/amba-pl011.c     | 6 ++----
> > > >  drivers/tty/serial/atmel_serial.c   | 6 ++----
> > > >  drivers/tty/serial/fsl_lpuart.c     | 6 ++----
> > > >  drivers/tty/serial/imx.c            | 6 ++----
> > > >  drivers/tty/serial/msm_serial.c     | 6 ++----
> > > >  drivers/tty/serial/mxs-auart.c      | 6 ++----
> > > >  drivers/tty/serial/pch_uart.c       | 6 ++----
> > > >  drivers/tty/serial/samsung_tty.c    | 6 ++----
> > > >  drivers/tty/serial/serial-tegra.c   | 6 ++----
> > > >  drivers/tty/serial/sh-sci.c         | 9 +++------
> > > >  drivers/tty/serial/sprd_serial.c    | 3 +--
> > > >  drivers/tty/serial/stm32-usart.c    | 6 ++----
> > > >  15 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 58 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > Reviewed-by: Thierry Reding <treding at nvidia.com>
> > 
> > Krzysztof, now look at this case. I would argue that this is even less fit than
> > # subpart(s) case, because it might imply anything. Again the problem is the
> > bundle, and for such a case (when tons of independent changes are bundled in
> > the same stuff, *every* Rb tag has to be explained on what has been reviewed!
> 
> It may be a bit subtle, but the placement of the tag indicates that it
> applies to the entirety of the changes. I didn't crop the list of
> changed files, nor did I omit the summary.

This doesn't clarify the question. Wordless Rb tag on a bundles is an oddity.

> That bit of meta-data obviously isn't picked up into the tag line, but
> I think the default meaning of Reviewed-by is that it applies to the
> entire thing.

And I interpret it otherwise, because this is a set of independent changes
bundled into a single patch!

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko