From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Claude Code Review Bot To: dri-devel-reviews@example.com Subject: Claude review: Fix kernel-doc for amdgpu_display_manager Date: Tue, 05 May 2026 10:56:41 +1000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20260430010405.52591-1-kenner.linuxdev@gmail.com> References: <20260430010405.52591-1-kenner.linuxdev@gmail.com> <20260430010405.52591-1-kenner.linuxdev@gmail.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 **Change:** Adds one line to the struct-level kernel-doc comment block (lin= es 321-351 of `amdgpu_dm.h`) for the `@boot_time_crc_info` member: ``` + * @boot_time_crc_info: Stores CRC information collected during boot ``` **Assessment: Correct.** The `boot_time_crc_info` member (line 708, `struct dm_boot_time_crc_info bo= ot_time_crc_info`) already has an inline per-member kernel-doc comment at l= ines 703-707, but the top-level struct documentation comment was missing th= e corresponding `@boot_time_crc_info` entry =E2=80=94 which is what trigger= s the `make htmldocs` warning. The added description is consistent with the= inline comment ("Buffer info for the boot time crc") and the struct defini= tion (`struct dm_boot_time_crc_info` at lines 112-124, which holds a CPU ad= dress, BO pointer, GPU address, and size for a boot-time CRC buffer). **Nits (minor, not blocking):** 1. **Commit subject line** =E2=80=94 The subject `Fix kernel-doc for amdgpu= _display_manager` lacks the conventional subsystem prefix. Typical AMDGPU d= isplay patches use `drm/amd/display:` as a prefix, e.g.: ``` drm/amd/display: Fix kernel-doc warning for amdgpu_display_manager ``` 2. **Commit message style** =E2=80=94 The body uses first person ("i added = the description") which is unusual for kernel commit messages; the conventi= onal kernel style uses imperative mood ("Add the missing description..."). = The lowercase "i" should also be capitalized. 3. **Completeness** =E2=80=94 The top-level struct doc comment is missing d= escriptions for many other members beyond `boot_time_crc_info` (the struct = has ~50+ members but the top comment only documents ~18). This patch only s= ilences *one* warning, but that's fine =E2=80=94 fixing all missing descrip= tions is out of scope for this patch. **No functional concerns** =E2=80=94 this is a documentation-only change wi= th zero runtime impact. --- Generated by Claude Code Patch Reviewer