> On 4/17/26 8:36 AM, Lorenzo Bianconi wrote:
> > @@ -1055,8 +1058,33 @@ static void airoha_qdma_cleanup_tx_queue(struct airoha_queue *q)
> >  		e->dma_addr = 0;
> >  		e->skb = NULL;
> >  		list_add_tail(&e->list, &q->tx_list);
> > +
> > +		/* Reset DMA descriptor */
> > +		WRITE_ONCE(desc->ctrl, 0);
> > +		WRITE_ONCE(desc->addr, 0);
> > +		WRITE_ONCE(desc->data, 0);
> > +		WRITE_ONCE(desc->msg0, 0);
> > +		WRITE_ONCE(desc->msg1, 0);
> > +		WRITE_ONCE(desc->msg2, 0);
> 
> Sashiko has some complains on this patch that look legit to me.
> 
> Also the pre-existing issues mentioned WRT patch 1/2 makes such patch
> IMHO almost ineffective, I think you should address them in the same series.
> 
> Note that you should have commented on sashiko review on the ML, it
> would have saved a significant amount of time on us.

Since this series is marked as 'Changes Requested', it is not clear to me what
next steps are. I guess we have two possible approach here:

1) - Post patch 1/2 ("net: airoha: Move ndesc initialization at
     end of airoha_qdma_init_tx()") with the series available upstream
     (not merged yet) in [0] where I am fixing similar issues for
     airoha_qdma_init_rx_queue() and airoha_qdma_tx_irq_init().
   - Post patch 2/2 ("net: airoha: Add missing bits in
     airoha_qdma_cleanup_tx_queue()") with a fix for airoha_ndo_stop() waiting
     for TX/RX DMA engine to complete before running
     airoha_qdma_cleanup_tx_queue().

2) - Since all the issues rised by Sashiko are not strictly related to this
     series and they are already fixed in pending patches, just apply the fixes
     separately without the needs to repost this series.

Which approach do you prefer?

Regards,
Lorenzo

[0] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/cover/20260420-airoha_qdma_init_rx_queue-fix-v2-0-d99347e5c18d@kernel.org/

> 
> /P
>