Re: [PATCH 4/5] dmaengine: lgm-dma: Added HDMA software mode TX function.

[Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>]

On 30/07/2025 04:45, Zhu Yixin wrote:
> Added HDMA software mode to handle DMA TX functions.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Zhu Yixin <yzhu@maxlinear.com>
> ---
>  .../devicetree/bindings/dma/intel,ldma.yaml   |   6 +
>  drivers/dma/lgm/lgm-cdma.c                    |  42 +-
>  drivers/dma/lgm/lgm-dma.c                     | 189 +++++---
>  drivers/dma/lgm/lgm-dma.h                     |  31 +-
>  drivers/dma/lgm/lgm-hdma.c                    | 453 +++++++++++++++++-
>  5 files changed, 608 insertions(+), 113 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/intel,ldma.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/intel,ldma.yaml
> index f91d849edc4c..e58f1d13aee3 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/intel,ldma.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dma/intel,ldma.yaml
> @@ -118,6 +118,11 @@ properties:
>      description:
>        Name of the DMA.
>  
> +  intel,dma-hw-desc:
> +    type: boolean
> +    description:
> +      DMA descriptor manupulated by Hardware.
Your commit msg explains nothing, so basically: no. Write proper commit
msgs documenting hardware, not software.

Please run scripts/checkpatch.pl on the patches and fix reported
warnings. After that, run also 'scripts/checkpatch.pl --strict' on the
patches and (probably) fix more warnings. Some warnings can be ignored,
especially from --strict run, but the code here looks like it needs a
fix. Feel free to get in touch if the warning is not clear.

<form letter>
Please use scripts/get_maintainers.pl to get a list of necessary people
and lists to CC. It might happen, that command when run on an older
kernel, gives you outdated entries. Therefore please be sure you base
your patches on recent Linux kernel.

Tools like b4 or scripts/get_maintainer.pl provide you proper list of
people, so fix your workflow. Tools might also fail if you work on some
ancient tree (don't, instead use mainline) or work on fork of kernel
(don't, instead use mainline). Just use b4 and everything should be
fine, although remember about `b4 prep --auto-to-cc` if you added new
patches to the patchset.

You missed at least devicetree list (maybe more), so this won't be
tested by automated tooling. Performing review on untested code might be
a waste of time.

Please kindly resend and include all necessary To/Cc entries.
</form letter>

Best regards,
Krzysztof