From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Claude Code Review Bot <claude-review@example.com>
To: dri-devel-reviews@example.com
Subject: Claude review: drm/bridge: samsung-dsim: use drm_bridge_clear_and_put() to put the next bridge
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2026 13:16:32 +1000
Message-ID: <review-patch2-20260310-drm-bridge-atomic-vs-remove-clear_and_put-v2-2-51fe222f3cf0@bootlin.com>
In-Reply-To: <20260310-drm-bridge-atomic-vs-remove-clear_and_put-v2-2-51fe222f3cf0@bootlin.com>
References: <20260310-drm-bridge-atomic-vs-remove-clear_and_put-v2-0-51fe222f3cf0@bootlin.com> <20260310-drm-bridge-atomic-vs-remove-clear_and_put-v2-2-51fe222f3cf0@bootlin.com>
X-Mailer: Claude Code Patch Reviewer
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
MIME-Version: 1.0

Patch Review

**Code review**:

The conversion is mechanical and correct. In `samsung_dsim_host_attach` error path (`drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/samsung-dsim.c:1991`):
```c
err_release_next_bridge:
	drm_bridge_clear_and_put(&dsi->bridge.next_bridge);
	if (!(device->mode_flags & MIPI_DSI_MODE_VIDEO))
```

And in `samsung_dsim_host_detach` (`drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/samsung-dsim.c:2008`):
```c
	drm_bridge_clear_and_put(&dsi->bridge.next_bridge);
```

Both replace the previous `drm_bridge_put()` + explicit `= NULL` pattern.

- **Correctness**: The blank line removal in the error path (between the put and the `if` check) is a minor style change bundled in. This is fine but worth noting.

- **Reviewed-by tag present**: Already has a Reviewed-by from Osama Abdelkader.

- **No functional change** beyond the ordering of NULL-assignment vs put, which is the whole point.

Overall: a clean, low-risk series. The main actionable feedback is whether `WRITE_ONCE` should be used in patch 1 to actually deliver on the stated concurrency safety promise.

---
Generated by Claude Code Patch Reviewer