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/edid: extract section header processing into helper Date: Mon, 25 May 2026 22:19:21 +1000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20260520021432.1301326-2-chen-yu.chen@amd.com> References: <20260520021432.1301326-1-chen-yu.chen@amd.com> <20260520021432.1301326-2-chen-yu.chen@amd.com> X-Mailer: Claude Code Patch Reviewer Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit MIME-Version: 1.0 Patch Review **Purpose:** Refactors `update_displayid_info()` to extract the header processing into `drm_displayid_process_section_header()`, removes the `break` so the iterator can walk all blocks. **Correctness:** The logic is preserved correctly. The `header_processed` flag ensures the header is processed only once, and removing the `break` is necessary for Patch 2 to iterate to the Display Parameters block. **Style issues:** The new helper has inconsistent indentation compared to the original code and kernel coding style: ```c drm_dbg_kms(connector->dev, "[CONNECTOR:%d:%s] DisplayID extension version 0x%02x, primary use 0x%02x\n", connector->base.id, connector->name, ``` The format string arguments should align with the opening parenthesis of `drm_dbg_kms`, as the original code did: ```c "[CONNECTOR:%d:%s] DisplayID extension version 0x%02x, primary use 0x%02x\n", ``` Similarly, the `if` condition: ```c if (displayid_version(iter) == DISPLAY_ID_STRUCTURE_VER_20 && (displayid_primary_use(iter) == PRIMARY_USE_HEAD_MOUNTED_VR || displayid_primary_use(iter) == PRIMARY_USE_HEAD_MOUNTED_AR)) ``` The original code had proper alignment with the condition on the `if`: ```c (displayid_primary_use(&iter) == PRIMARY_USE_HEAD_MOUNTED_VR || displayid_primary_use(&iter) == PRIMARY_USE_HEAD_MOUNTED_AR)) ``` These are minor but inconsistent with both the original code and typical kernel style. **No functional concerns.** --- --- Generated by Claude Code Patch Reviewer