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

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Thu, Nov 05, 2026 at 03:35:20PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 05/11/2026 15:17, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >>> ---
> >>>  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!
> 
> I think this case is obvious - Thierry reviewed this patch and gives Rb
> tag, according to reviewer's statement of oversight.

It's unclear from a bare tag, It misses that kind of information. Documentation
is also unclear to me as it does *not* describe the case what should I do when
independent things are mixed together.

> I don't see a problem here or what is questionable.

And I obviously see the issue.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko