From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Claude Code Review Bot To: dri-devel-reviews@example.com Subject: Claude review: dt-bindings: display: panel: Add Novatek NT35532 LCD DSI Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2026 03:00:52 +1000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20260321-rimob-new-features-v3-1-d4b8ee867de7@protonmail.com> References: <20260321-rimob-new-features-v3-0-d4b8ee867de7@protonmail.com> <20260321-rimob-new-features-v3-1-d4b8ee867de7@protonmail.com> X-Mailer: Claude Code Patch Reviewer Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit MIME-Version: 1.0 Patch Review The binding looks reasonable and follows existing panel binding patterns. **Minor issue: `vddam-supply` defined but never used.** The binding defines: ```yaml vddam-supply: description: power supply for MIPI interface ``` But the panel driver (patch 2) does not request a `vddam` regulator - only `vci`, `vddi`, `avee`, and `avdd`. And the DTS (patch 3) never specifies `vddam-supply`. If this supply exists in the datasheet but isn't used on the only known board, it's fine to document it in the binding. But verify it's actually a real supply from the NT35532 datasheet - no other kernel driver references `vddam`. **Nit: compatible is `const`, not a list.** This means only bare NT35532 panels are supported, with no board-specific compatibles. This is fine for a simple panel, but if different boards use different init sequences, a pattern like `"vendor,board-panel", "novatek,nt35532"` might be more future-proof. Not a blocker. The MAINTAINERS entry is correct but is missing the driver file entry (added in patch 2, which is the right split). --- Generated by Claude Code Patch Reviewer