Re: [PATCH 1/1] ntb: use dmaengine_get_dma_device() instead of chan->device->dev

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] ntb: missed replacing chan->device->dev in perf_dma_filter()
- [Low] ntb: commit message incorrectly mentions IIO instead of NTB
--

commit 00ad86ab4ff3c677b79412d332638c7a5186dbbe
Author: Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>

ntb: use dmaengine_get_dma_device() instead of chan->device->dev

This commit replaces direct chan->device->dev access with the proper
dmaengine_get_dma_device() accessor in NTB DMA consumers. It prepares
for making the DMA engine provider data structures private.

>     Replace direct dma_chan::device::dev access with the proper
>     dmaengine_get_dma_device() accessor in IIO DMA consumers.

[Severity: Low]
This isn't a bug, but the commit message incorrectly mentions IIO DMA
consumers instead of NTB DMA consumers.

> diff --git a/drivers/ntb/test/ntb_perf.c b/drivers/ntb/test/ntb_perf.c
> index dfd175f79e8f0..b936f15079df2 100644
> --- a/drivers/ntb/test/ntb_perf.c
> +++ b/drivers/ntb/test/ntb_perf.c
[ ... ]
> @@ -869,6 +869,7 @@ static bool perf_dma_filter(struct dma_chan *chan, void *data)
>  static int perf_init_test(struct perf_thread *pthr)
>  {
>  	struct perf_ctx *perf = pthr->perf;
> +	struct device *dma_dev;

[Severity: Medium]
Does this patch miss a replacement in perf_dma_filter()?

Right above this hunk, perf_dma_filter() still accesses chan->device->dev
directly:

drivers/ntb/test/ntb_perf.c:perf_dma_filter() {
    ...
    return node == NUMA_NO_NODE || node == dev_to_node(chan->device->dev);
}

Since the goal is to prepare for making DMA engine structures private by
abstracting chan->device->dev behind dmaengine_get_dma_device(chan), will
leaving this direct access cause a build failure once the structure is made
private?

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260918204152.2364336-1-Frank.Li@oss.nxp.com?part=1