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

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 05/11/2026 17:20, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> 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

Documentation is clear and I quote to you multiple times, to which you
did not respond.

"Reviewed-by:, instead, indicates that *the patch* has been reviewed and
found acceptable according to the Reviewer's Statement:"

Important: "THE PATCH"

Further:

"I state that:
(a) I have carried out a technical review of *this patch* to evaluate
its appropriateness and readiness for inclusion into  the mainline kernel."

And further:

"A Reviewed-by tag is a statement of opinion that *the patch* is an"

All of these are exhaustive (as in complete) statements leaving no
interpretation whether this is part of patch or entire patch. It is THE
patch, meaning entire patch.

You do not drive your car, as only a wheel. You driver *the car*.

You live in some apartment. *The apartment* is your home, not "piece of
your apartment is your home".

Best regards,
Krzysztof