From: Claude Code Review Bot <claude-review@example.com>
To: dri-devel-reviews@example.com
Subject: Claude review: fbcon: Remove struct fbcon_display.inverse
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2026 16:55:06 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <review-patch1-20260209161609.251510-1-tzimmermann@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260209161609.251510-1-tzimmermann@suse.de>
Patch Review
**From:** Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>
**Subject:** [PATCH] fbcon: Remove struct fbcon_display.inverse
**Date:** Mon, 9 Feb 2026 17:15:43 +0100
**Summary:**
Removes the unused `inverse` field from `struct fbcon_display` in `drivers/video/fbdev/core/fbcon.h`.
**Technical Review:**
**Change Analysis:**
```c
- u_short inverse; /* != 0 text black on white as default */
```
The removal is clean and straightforward. The field is:
- Not referenced anywhere in the current codebase
- A simple structure member removal requiring no other code changes
- Properly reduces structure size
**Positive Aspects:**
1. **Valid cleanup**: Dead code removal improves code maintainability
2. **Minimal scope**: Single-line change reduces risk
3. **Proper structure**: Includes sign-off, Cc to stable
**Issues Identified:**
1. **CRITICAL - Incorrect Fixes tag:**
```
Fixes: c7ef5e285c84 ("video: fbdev: atari: Fix inverse handling")
```
As Helge Deller correctly points out in his review (patch-series-filtered.mbx:343-346):
> That commit seems not to be related, as it touches a static
> inverse variable inside the atafb driver only.
> Commit e4fc27618b75 (from 2005) touched it last time, but it seems even older.
The referenced commit c7ef5e285c84 modified a *different* `inverse` variable (a static local in the atafb driver), not the struct member being removed. This makes the Fixes tag incorrect and misleading.
2. **Questionable stable backport tag:**
```
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v6.0+
```
This is dead code removal with no functional impact. Stable backports should be reserved for actual fixes. This change:
- Doesn't fix a bug
- Doesn't resolve a security issue
- Doesn't address a regression
- Provides no user-visible benefit
The stable backport is unnecessary and wastes backport effort.
3. **Commit message could be more thorough:**
The message doesn't explain:
- When/why the field became unused
- What originally used it
- How it was verified to be completely unused
**Missing Analysis:**
- No explanation of how the field was verified as unused (grep output, code inspection methodology)
- No historical context about what originally populated/read this field
- The commit message states "apparently never did anything" but then references a commit from v6.0, creating confusion
**Testing Considerations:**
- This is a compile-time-only change
- No runtime testing needed
- Should verify structure size change is acceptable for any ABI considerations (though fbcon internals should not be ABI)
**Resolution:**
The maintainer (Helge Deller) handled this correctly:
- Identified the incorrect Fixes tag
- Applied the patch with corrected commit message
- Presumably removed the inappropriate stable tag
**Recommendation:**
The cleanup itself is valid, but the patch metadata was flawed. With the corrections applied by the maintainer, this is acceptable. Future submissions should:
- Verify Fixes tags reference the actual relevant commit
- Reserve stable backports for actual fixes
- Provide more historical context in commit messages
**Final Verdict:** ACCEPTABLE (with maintainer corrections applied)
The dead code removal is correct, but the submission quality could have been better. The maintainer's intervention caught and corrected the errors.
---
Generated by Claude Code Patch Reviewer
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-02-11 6:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-02-09 16:15 [PATCH] fbcon: Remove struct fbcon_display.inverse Thomas Zimmermann
2026-02-09 21:31 ` Helge Deller
2026-02-10 9:06 ` Thomas Zimmermann
2026-02-11 6:55 ` Claude review: " Claude Code Review Bot
2026-02-11 6:55 ` Claude Code Review Bot [this message]
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=review-patch1-20260209161609.251510-1-tzimmermann@suse.de \
--to=claude-review@example.com \
--cc=dri-devel-reviews@example.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