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/vmwgfx: Don't use UTS_RELEASE directly Date: Tue, 05 May 2026 08:34:38 +1000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20260504073422.1130008-2-u.kleine-koenig@baylibre.com> References: <20260504073422.1130008-2-u.kleine-koenig@baylibre.com> <20260504073422.1130008-2-u.kleine-koenig@baylibre.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 **Verdict: Looks good / No issues.** The patch makes three changes: 1. **Removes `#include `** =E2=80=94 this header pr= ovided the `UTS_RELEASE` macro, no longer needed. 2. **Adds `#include `** =E2=80=94 provides `init_utsname()= `. Placed in correct alphabetical order among the `` includes. 3. **Replaces the macro usage:** ```c - VMWGFX_DRIVER_PATCHLEVEL, UTS_RELEASE); + VMWGFX_DRIVER_PATCHLEVEL, init_utsname()->release); ``` This is the only usage of `UTS_RELEASE` in the file, so the include swap is= complete. The `init_utsname()->release` accessor returns the same NUL-term= inated string at runtime, so the `%s` format specifier in `vmw_host_printf`= works identically. The pattern is already established in other DRM drivers =E2=80=94 `drivers/= gpu/drm/i915/i915_gpu_error.c` and `drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_guc_log.c` both u= se `init_utsname()->release` the same way. The commit message clearly explains the motivation (build reproducibility /= avoiding unnecessary recompilation) and the cover letter honestly notes th= at dropping the version string entirely would be an alternative, which show= s good judgment in choosing the less disruptive option. **Reviewed-by worthy.** No correctness, style, or design concerns. --- Generated by Claude Code Patch Reviewer