Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider: - [Low] Kernel-doc build warning introduced by removing the `@dev:` documentation tag while retaining `dev` in the structure. --
commit 0443f99a737aae399ea7d93dad586cf7543a34af Author: Frank Li <[email protected]> dmaengine: add union chan_dev for dma_chan::dev for clarity This commit introduces an anonymous union in struct dma_chan to provide a chan_dev member alongside the existing dev member, clarifying its purpose as the per-channel device. It also updates the kernel-doc to document chan_dev instead of dev. > diff --git a/include/linux/dmaengine.h b/include/linux/dmaengine.h > index 33aa1bfc8fb84..c3a49a33307c6 100644 > --- a/include/linux/dmaengine.h > +++ b/include/linux/dmaengine.h > @@ -325,7 +325,8 @@ struct dma_router { > * @lock: protect between config and prepare transfer when driver have not > * implemented callback device_prep_config_sg(). > * @chan_id: channel ID for sysfs > - * @dev: class device for sysfs > + * @chan_dev: class channel device for sysfs, some device use it for > per-channel > + * IOMMU mapping. > * @name: backlink name for sysfs > * @dbg_client_name: slave name for debugfs in format: [ ... ] > @@ -351,7 +352,14 @@ struct dma_chan { > > /* sysfs */ > int chan_id; > - struct dma_chan_dev *dev; > + union { > + struct dma_chan_dev *chan_dev; > + /* > + * Use chan_dev; dev will be removed once all users are > + * converted. > + */ > + struct dma_chan_dev *dev; > + }; [Severity: Low] Does this removal of the @dev kernel-doc tag trigger a kernel-doc build warning? Since the dev member is kept inside an anonymous union for backward compatibility, and the kernel-doc parser flattens anonymous unions, it typically expects all non-private members to be explicitly documented. Would it be better to retain the @dev documentation tag with a note indicating it is deprecated, or mark it as private to avoid the build warning? -- Sashiko AI review ยท https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/[email protected]?part=4
