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/bridge: synopsys: dw-dp: Support unregistering the AUX channel Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2026 13:55:05 +1000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20260601-drm-rk-fixes-v4-1-c3f3f123e1da@collabora.com> References: <20260601-drm-rk-fixes-v4-0-c3f3f123e1da@collabora.com> <20260601-drm-rk-fixes-v4-1-c3f3f123e1da@collabora.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 **Correctness: Good.** The new `dw_dp_unbind()` function correctly calls `d= rm_dp_aux_unregister(&dp->aux)`, which is the counterpart to the `drm_dp_au= x_register(&dp->aux)` at line 2051 of the existing code. The function takes= `struct dw_dp *dp` which is the opaque type returned by `dw_dp_bind()`, so= the API is consistent. ```c +void dw_dp_unbind(struct dw_dp *dp) +{ + drm_dp_aux_unregister(&dp->aux); +} +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dw_dp_unbind); ``` **Minor design observation:** The existing `dw_dp_bind()` already uses `dev= m_add_action_or_reset()` for the PHY exit cleanup (line 2071). The AUX unre= gister could similarly be wrapped in a devres action right after `drm_dp_au= x_register()` succeeds, which would eliminate the need for callers to call = `dw_dp_unbind()` at all and would be more in line with the function's exist= ing resource management pattern. That said, the explicit unbind approach wo= rks correctly and gives callers control over ordering, which is a reasonabl= e design choice. **Header change is correct** =E2=80=94 adds the declaration to `include/drm= /bridge/dw_dp.h` next to the existing `dw_dp_bind()` declaration. **Fixes tag is correct** =E2=80=94 references the commit that introduced `d= w_dp_bind()` without a matching unbind. No issues. --- Generated by Claude Code Patch Reviewer