From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Claude Code Review Bot To: dri-devel-reviews@example.com Subject: Claude review: drm/exec: Remove the index parameter from drm_exec_for_each_locked_obj[_reverse] Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2026 07:52:57 +1000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20260331092023.81616-2-thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com> References: <20260331092023.81616-1-thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com> <20260331092023.81616-2-thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com> X-Mailer: Claude Code Patch Reviewer Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Patch Review **Looks good.** Removing the unused `index` parameter from all call sites a= nd replacing it with a `_index` variable scoped to the `for` statement is c= lean. One minor note: using `_index` as a variable name in a macro =E2=80=94 name= s beginning with underscore are technically reserved in certain scopes per = C standard, though this is common practice in kernel macros. `__index` woul= d technically be worse; `_index` is fine practically. All call sites are updated correctly. The `drm_exec_unlock_all()` in `drm_e= xec.c`, the `amdgpu_cs.c` sites, `amdgpu_eviction_fence.c`, `drm_gpuvm.c`, = and `xe_vm.c` all consistently drop the now-removed parameter. The comment update for the reverse macro is appropriate: ```c - * reverse locking order. Note that @index may go below zero and wrap, + * reverse locking order. Note that the internal index may wrap around, ``` Reviewed-by worthy as-is. --- --- Generated by Claude Code Patch Reviewer