From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=198.175.65.11 ARC-Seal: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; t=1794247063; b=tiC/VFf3BUGk1Df55SC/rN/kMKp9FAzhO7WmP4W1cNs9sW44QHbVQCYD+D/YeSJIVVNV hcmutZZJjiLYpCbRWGa7fjOXM/7afJ2+AU0mdq7KP1+mHvP+m8+smhxU/wyjA87r0v7UM Z5p+G4Bw3kKlryjMVui/pfW/2P8chworSwAFnsncxTFff/vbKRdKnZhPKsVK2HVoYlaXb /I8Q1bwUXmCJwxseFWxU6kdyo4BOFTJQs3o6sH8Xd/vghWzYCBp7w5kWpxboh5Ez2HdhR 3Evq5PRnBUOeAkLhw7/jzB86S5hCsIP4fA5kj2tnKjW1KZwQUBu96pbaerzw1plQJjg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1794247063; h=DMARC-Filter:DKIM-Signature:X-CSE-ConnectionGUID:X-CSE-MsgGUID: X-IronPort-AV:X-IronPort-AV:Received:X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: X-CSE-MsgGUID:X-ExtLoop1:X-IronPort-AV:Received:Date:From:To:Cc: Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To:Organization; bh=9Cc+2gtfN2/LHuRHGFLJjMnOZd72QDWhyPb9mjrBQIM=; b=X1gN/k2HEpg8EJv3s+0GEcEAn1pTutt/VrfFrUq9dy/1hdIPQh8U/10aEHTx1IllmHAe y9OnyXL7W3RsjYg7DZjSMViSl6mnd63UMZxoxcGsTEmKB4iA3B/cgXW93W7sSNCqYuGcD 8ZH407KVCQuBCZ/rLIKzFp5kgdR62dbO3kSou51VkvDtUbrSUKMIf3rx55Q4V+4S+OuQB EReEfAGQMKVoKRoZWkJpKl4dmgc/btiBxVq8PtJ3zIU1dgBPChbsqR5NbB1nDLWCaWY7d Duujcv4bi8T+ISXs10jcFZEzm6UoMy6KtV4ck6TtFj5LvIjoaX46rSvbUhT/Xq/+q4w== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=Intel header.b=RYE80E4L; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=198.175.65.11 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-ECDSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0B6DA606A330; Mon, 9 Nov 2026 17:57:41 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 smtp.subspace.kernel.org 0B6DA606A330 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=Intel header.b=RYE80E4L DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1794247062; x=1825783062; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=/GGAxNjyNSTAgb+4GsAIS07jSZ/uzkJHlCxb0K1tUUw=; b=RYE80E4L4jf+eo3yiNmYGvjkREiK14P7tpe2VTbck8ZSyfp/TeAWS5he Ydc1pMWVHQTvD6dqXwK2DCBMJREpZ2FA0BK5yRMiv3HT2aHyRUMQpt/ad 0YsiSK6ITcQ6TMxMbD0ojpZZtMh8nej1ULGVuNc4NOQje0LVgQI7V9k1n RwbgmQ1f17yoZnD3BGGoXT+41rwyrOKWFwlc09/3aKQ3FWis09A6urYN1 he6mfWqzIbpzf4W+kESQ1CHyspmUeLnmkAMmd5Dc/Eo9K51umHnm+CxzA Rrq7rC/Vq8QK2pdUWOp6cryd3vA2ccLYPwU43a/bRbqxyqnSiLqQvuerk Q==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: FpfBUQ7BRR2TCnmIZkPejA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: o+1uwiCcRj2issQ5Lq+qow== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6800,10657,11961"; a="2866556" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.27,204,1787036400"; d="scan'208";a="2866556" Received: from fmviesa004.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.144]) by orvoesa103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 09 Nov 2026 09:57:41 -0800 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: wb2AMpMXSwWy17Y7mVRXlA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: AJ9NiomKQuqzRxE8oUxCRw== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.27,204,1787036400"; d="scan'208";a="7927416" Received: from amilburn-desk.amilburn-desk (HELO localhost) ([10.245.244.144]) by smtpauth.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 09 Nov 2026 09:57:29 -0800 Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2026 19:57:26 +0200 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Krzysztof Kozlowski Cc: Frank.Li@oss.nxp.com, Mark Brown , Nicolas Ferre , Alexandre Belloni , Claudiu Beznea , Radu Pirea , CL Wang , Ryan Wanner , Florian Fainelli , Ray Jui , Scott Branden , Broadcom internal kernel review list , Vladimir Oltean , Frank Li , Sascha Hauer , Pengutronix Kernel Team , Fabio Estevam , Han Xu , Haibo Chen , Linus Walleij , Daniel Mack , Haojian Zhuang , Robert Jarzmik , Heiko Stuebner , Fabrizio Castro , Andi Shyti , Tudor Ambarus , Peter Griffin , Alim Akhtar , Yixun Lan , Troy Mitchell , Maxime Coquelin , Alexandre Torgue , Alain Volmat , Chen-Yu Tsai , Jernej Skrabec , Samuel Holland , Laxman Dewangan , Thierry Reding , Jonathan Hunter , Sowjanya Komatineni , Kunihiko Hayashi , Masami Hiramatsu , "open list:SPI SUBSYSTEM" , "moderated list:ARM/Microchip (AT91) SoC support" , open list , "moderated list:BROADCOM BCM2711/BCM2835 ARM ARCHITECTURE" , "open list:FREESCALE DSPI DRIVER" , "open list:ARM/QUALCOMM MAILING LIST" , "open list:ARM/Rockchip SoC support" , "open list:RENESAS RZ/V2H(P) RSPI DRIVER" , "open list:SAMSUNG SPI DRIVERS" , "open list:RISC-V SPACEMIT SoC Support" , "open list:RISC-V SPACEMIT SoC Support" , "moderated list:ARM/STM32 ARCHITECTURE" , "open list:ARM/Allwinner sunXi SoC support" , "open list:TEGRA ARCHITECTURE SUPPORT" , Mukesh Kumar Savaliya , Wolfram Sang , Thierry Reding Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] spi: use dmaengine_desc_set_callback() Message-ID: References: <7f96599b-681d-4963-bdda-1274371ac84f@kernel.org> <9e39502a-dd17-4fa2-98a3-9019523cb5e8@kernel.org> <63c24437-4261-4a51-be7e-31ac0759a095@kernel.org> <00390a20-7630-4066-9779-06c8f915a176@kernel.org> <3dc7277e-2f6b-44a6-9085-2e33d989c1c9@kernel.org> X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: List-Owner: Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3dc7277e-2f6b-44a6-9085-2e33d989c1c9@kernel.org> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - c/o Alberga Business Park, 6 krs, Bertel Jungin Aukio 5, 02600 Espoo On Fri, Nov 06, 2026 at 08:20:33AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 05/11/2026 10:34, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 05, 2026 at 10:07:30AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >> On 05/11/2026 10:04, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > >>> On Wed, Nov 04, 2026 at 11:54:56PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >>>> On 04/11/2026 21:41, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> But sure, if we want to play such numbers game, I will be sending > >>>>>> reviews for single lines. > >>>>> > >>>>> I'm not playing anything. The problem is that the patch unites the files that > >>>>> have distinct maintainers and unrelated to each other code. That's why in the > >>>>> subsystems I maintain, I almost always require to split on per-driver basis. > >>>>> Yes, exceptions are possible, but has to be quite rare. > >>>> > >>>> That's independent problem. Patch could be split, but it was not. Since > >>>> it was not, receiving end should act accordingly, e.g. when performing > >>>> incomplete review of only part of the patch, do not call that entire > >>>> patch was reviewed by giving the Rb tag, but give Ack tag. > >>> > >>> No, (partial) Rb != Ack. > >> > >> It is, because there is no partial Rb tag. > >> > >> There is partial review, but not partial Rb tag, please see exactly > >> submitting patches. It repeats the same in three separate places: > >> > >> "Acked-by.... user may not have carried out a technical review of the > >> patch,yet they may be satisfied ..." > >> > >> "Reviewed-by:, instead, indicates that the patch has been reviewed and > >> found acceptable according to the Reviewer's Statement:" > >> > >> Above important: "THE PATCH" > >> > >> It is not "the patch or its parts" > >> > >> 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" > >> > >> In three places it is THIS or THE patch. Complete (exhaustive) list of > >> options what can be reviewed to get the credit and give statement of > >> oversight. > >> > >> Statement of oversight DOES NOT include "part of the patch". > > > > So, it means I MUST from now on REQUIRE a split before reviewing. > > Right? > > Why "from now on"? The reviewer's statement of oversight is worded like > that since beginning? Also nothing stops you from reviewing parts. We > discuss the statement of oversight and its result: giving Rb tag. The Rb > tag is not output of some review, but agreement with statement of > oversight and performing what is stated there. > > You can review parts, but you do not provide Rb tag. No, I'm not going to review something that I may not put Rb tag on. I can NAK or ignore (or Ack without viewing, but it equals to ignore to me). -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko