Claude review: drm/bridge: tc358762: Use mipi_dsi_generic_write_multi()

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

Patch Review

**Correctness: Good.** The conversion is functionally equivalent to the original code:

1. The `int error` field is removed from `struct tc358762`, and `tc358762_clear_error()` is deleted. These are replaced by `struct mipi_dsi_multi_context dsi_ctx` declared locally in `tc358762_init()`, which provides the same `accum_err` accumulation semantics via the kernel API.

2. `tc358762_write()` signature changes from `(struct tc358762 *ctx, ...)` to `(struct mipi_dsi_multi_context *dsi_ctx, ...)`. The old early-return-on-error check and manual error store:
   ```c
   if (ctx->error)
       return;
   ...
   ret = mipi_dsi_generic_write(dsi, data, sizeof(data));
   if (ret < 0)
       ctx->error = ret;
   ```
   are both handled internally by `mipi_dsi_generic_write_multi()`, which checks `ctx->accum_err` before writing and stores any error automatically.

3. The final `return tc358762_clear_error(ctx)` is replaced by `return dsi_ctx.accum_err`, which is the correct way to retrieve the accumulated error from the multi-context.

4. All call sites in `tc358762_init()` are updated consistently from `tc358762_write(ctx, ...)` to `tc358762_write(&dsi_ctx, ...)`.

**Minor nit:** There is a leftover extra blank line in `tc358762_write()`:

```c
static void tc358762_write(struct mipi_dsi_multi_context *dsi_ctx, u16 addr, u32 val)
{
	u8 data[6];


	data[0] = addr;
```

There are two blank lines between the variable declaration and the first assignment. This is cosmetic-only, but one blank line would be more consistent with kernel style.

**Missing CC:** The `MAINTAINERS` file for `DRM BRIDGE ACTIVE COMPONENTS` likely lists maintainers who should be CC'd. The patch is CC'd to Andrzej Hajda, Neil Armstrong, and Robert Foss, which appear to be the bridge subsystem maintainers, so this is probably fine.

**Overall:** This is a clean, well-motivated cleanup. The commit message is clear about what it does. The patch is small, correct, and follows the established pattern used by other drivers.

---
Generated by Claude Code Patch Reviewer