Claude review: drm: bridge: ti-sn65dsi83: Fix DSI mode flags for stable LVDS output

[Claude Code Review Bot <claude-review@example.com>]

Overall Series Review

Subject: drm: bridge: ti-sn65dsi83: Fix DSI mode flags for stable LVDS output
Author: Sudarshan Shetty <tessolveupstream@gmail.com>
Patches: 3
Reviewed: 2026-05-28T12:36:18.878762

---

This is a straightforward 2-patch series that removes three DSI mode flags (`MIPI_DSI_MODE_VIDEO_NO_HFP`, `MIPI_DSI_MODE_VIDEO_NO_HBP`, and `MIPI_DSI_MODE_VIDEO_BURST`) from the ti-sn65dsi83 bridge driver to improve LVDS output stability.

The changes are well-motivated. The driver explicitly programs HFP, HBP, hsync, and vsync timing values into the bridge chip's registers (lines 666–679), meaning it depends on receiving these values from the DSI host. Using `NO_HFP`/`NO_HBP` flags instructs the DSI host to suppress transmission of those blanking periods, which is contradictory — the bridge needs that timing information to reconstruct valid LVDS output. The removal makes the driver's DSI-side configuration consistent with the register programming on the LVDS side.

The split into two patches (HFP/HBP flags vs. burst mode) is appropriate since the two changes have different justifications and different risk profiles. The series has Tested-by tags from two independent testers (Luca Ceresoli and Alexander Stein), providing good validation.

**Concern:** These are behavioral changes that affect all users of this driver, not just the submitter's platform. Removing burst mode (patch 2) could be a regression for platforms that currently work with burst mode. The commit message for patch 2 is honest about this ("depending on the host controller implementation") but doesn't explain why non-burst mode is universally correct. This is worth scrutiny from the maintainers.

Overall: Patch 1 is clearly correct. Patch 2 is reasonable but more debatable.

---
Generated by Claude Code Patch Reviewer