From: Claude Code Review Bot <claude-review@example.com>
To: dri-devel-reviews@example.com
Subject: Claude review: drm/bridge: pass down IRQ_HPD to the drivers
Date: Sat, 16 May 2026 11:25:50 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <review-patch2-20260513-hpd-irq-events-v3-2-086857017f16@oss.qualcomm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260513-hpd-irq-events-v3-2-086857017f16@oss.qualcomm.com>
Patch Review
This is the bulk of the mechanical plumbing — extending `hpd_cb`, `hpd_notify` (bridge funcs callback), `oob_hotplug_event` (connector funcs callback), and all their callers/implementers to take the extra `enum drm_connector_status_extra` parameter.
**Issue: Spurious whitespace change in ti-tfp410.c**
```c
-
static inline struct tfp410 *
drm_connector_to_tfp410(struct drm_connector *connector)
```
A blank line between two `static inline` function definitions is removed. This is unrelated to the patch purpose and will create unnecessary merge noise.
**Issue: `drm_bridge_hpd_notify()` hardcodes `DRM_CONNECTOR_NO_EXTRA_STATUS`**
In `drm_bridge.c`:
```c
if (bridge->hpd_cb)
- bridge->hpd_cb(bridge->hpd_data, status);
+ bridge->hpd_cb(bridge->hpd_data, status, DRM_CONNECTOR_NO_EXTRA_STATUS);
```
This is correct for this intermediate step since patch 3 renames this to `drm_bridge_hpd_notify_extra()` and makes it pass through. But it does mean patch 2 is not fully bisectable for any driver that wants to use `drm_bridge_hpd_notify()` with extra status between patches 2 and 3. This is fine since no such caller exists at that point.
**Observation: `drm_bridge_connector_handle_hpd` unconditionally sets `connector->status`**
```c
mutex_lock(&dev->mode_config.mutex);
connector->status = status;
mutex_unlock(&dev->mode_config.mutex);
drm_bridge_connector_hpd_notify(connector, status, extra_status);
drm_kms_helper_connector_hotplug_event(connector);
```
When an IRQ_HPD event arrives with `status == connector_status_connected` (which is what DP altmode sends), this will still set `connector->status` and fire `drm_kms_helper_connector_hotplug_event()`. This means every IRQ_HPD also triggers a full connector hotplug re-detection cycle. For MST sideband messages that can be frequent, this could cause unnecessary work. Is this intentional? The MSM driver's internal HPD path (via `DP_DP_IRQ_HPD_INT_MASK`) only queues `EV_IRQ_HPD_INT` without re-triggering the full hotplug cycle. Consider whether `drm_bridge_connector_handle_hpd` should skip the status update and hotplug event when only `extra_status` is set (i.e., the status hasn't actually changed).
**Intel i915: extra_status is ignored**
The `intel_dp_oob_hotplug_event()` function gains the `extra_status` parameter but doesn't use it. Looking at the current implementation, i915 only tracks connect/disconnect state transitions via `oob_hotplug_last_state`. If an IRQ_HPD arrives with the same connection status, the `hpd_high != test_bit(...)` check will be false and the event will be silently dropped. This means DP MST events via USB-C will be lost on i915. This may be intentional for now (the cover letter says only MSM is wired up), but it's worth noting as a gap — i915 USB-C DP MST will still be broken.
---
Generated by Claude Code Patch Reviewer
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-16 1:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-13 18:23 [PATCH RESEND v3 0/6] drm: handle IRQ_HPD events correctly Dmitry Baryshkov
2026-05-13 18:23 ` [PATCH RESEND v3 1/6] drm/connector: report IRQ_HPD events to drm_connector_oob_hotplug_event() Dmitry Baryshkov
2026-05-16 1:25 ` Claude review: " Claude Code Review Bot
2026-05-13 18:23 ` [PATCH RESEND v3 2/6] drm/bridge: pass down IRQ_HPD to the drivers Dmitry Baryshkov
2026-05-16 1:25 ` Claude Code Review Bot [this message]
2026-05-13 18:23 ` [PATCH RESEND v3 3/6] drm/bridge: aux-hpd: let drivers pass IRQ_HPD events Dmitry Baryshkov
2026-05-16 1:25 ` Claude review: " Claude Code Review Bot
2026-05-13 18:23 ` [PATCH RESEND v3 4/6] drm/msm: dp: handle the IRQ_HPD events reported by USB-C Dmitry Baryshkov
2026-05-16 1:25 ` Claude review: " Claude Code Review Bot
2026-05-13 18:23 ` [PATCH RESEND v3 5/6] soc: qcom: pmic-glink-altmode: pass down HPD_IRQ events Dmitry Baryshkov
2026-05-16 1:25 ` Claude review: " Claude Code Review Bot
2026-05-13 18:23 ` [PATCH RESEND v3 6/6] usb: typec: ucsi: huawei-gaokun: " Dmitry Baryshkov
2026-05-16 1:25 ` Claude review: " Claude Code Review Bot
2026-05-16 1:25 ` Claude review: drm: handle IRQ_HPD events correctly Claude Code Review Bot
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2026-04-20 23:33 [PATCH v3 0/6] " Dmitry Baryshkov
2026-04-20 23:33 ` [PATCH v3 2/6] drm/bridge: pass down IRQ_HPD to the drivers Dmitry Baryshkov
2026-04-22 23:07 ` Claude review: " Claude Code Review Bot
2026-04-20 15:31 [PATCH v2 0/6] drm: handle IRQ_HPD events correctly Dmitry Baryshkov
2026-04-20 15:31 ` [PATCH v2 2/6] drm/bridge: pass down IRQ_HPD to the drivers Dmitry Baryshkov
2026-04-22 23:32 ` Claude review: " Claude Code Review Bot
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=review-patch2-20260513-hpd-irq-events-v3-2-086857017f16@oss.qualcomm.com \
--to=claude-review@example.com \
--cc=dri-devel-reviews@example.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox