public inbox for linux-staging@lists.linux.dev
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Luka Gejak <luka.gejak@linux.dev>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: omer.e.idrissi@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-staging@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] rtw_sdio_if1_init cleanup and small logic tweak
Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2026 11:46:59 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5252F4DA-4FB2-4217-B13E-4B6AF912220B@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2026040119-smasher-oozy-8d41@gregkh>

On April 1, 2026 10:29:37 AM GMT+02:00, Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>On Tue, Mar 31, 2026 at 10:25:22PM +0200, Luka Gejak wrote:
>> Hi Omer,
>> Thank you for submitting this patch series. Efforts to clean up the 
>> initialization paths in these legacy Realtek staging drivers are 
>> always welcome, as they are a necessary step toward aligning the code 
>> with upstream kernel standards and eventually moving the driver out of
>> staging.
>> I have performed a detailed technical audit of the series. While the 
>
><snip>
>
>Luka, this review REALLY looks like it was AI generated, and then
>cut-pasted into here.  Please do not do that.
>
>If you wish to use AI to generate reviews, great, then use some of the
>tools we already have, and notify the submitter that this is an AI
>report and that it should be treated as such.  Don't try to pass it off
>as a human review that must actually be trusted.
>
>thanks,
>
>greg k-h

Hi Greg,
You're right, I used a tool to help format the response because 
English is not my native language and I wanted the review to be clear.
I see now that it made the response look like a bot report and I 
apologize for that. I'll stick to writing reviews manually going 
forward. However the technical issues I pointed out (like the inverted
_SUCCESS/_FAIL logic in the staging headers and the uninitialized 
pnetdev pointer) are real regressions I found while auditing the code 
on my local tree. I'll make sure future feedback is direct and clearly
identified if I use any tooling.
Thanks for the correction.
Best regards,
Luka Gejak

  reply	other threads:[~2026-04-01  9:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-03-31 20:25 [PATCH 0/5] rtw_sdio_if1_init cleanup and small logic tweak Luka Gejak
2026-04-01  8:29 ` Greg KH
2026-04-01  9:46   ` Luka Gejak [this message]
2026-04-01 14:35     ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2026-04-01  8:40 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2026-04-01 10:19 Luka Gejak
2026-04-01 10:17 Luka Gejak
2026-04-01 10:29 ` Greg KH
2026-04-01 10:50   ` Greg KH
2026-04-01 10:58     ` Luka Gejak
2026-04-01 10:56   ` Luka Gejak
2026-04-01 10:33 ` Dan Carpenter
2026-03-31 15:32 Omer El Idrissi
2026-04-01  1:39 ` Ethan Tidmore

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=5252F4DA-4FB2-4217-B13E-4B6AF912220B@linux.dev \
    --to=luka.gejak@linux.dev \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-staging@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=omer.e.idrissi@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox