From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Claude Code Review Bot To: dri-devel-reviews@example.com Subject: Claude review: dma-resv: Define guards for context-less dma_resv locks Date: Sat, 16 May 2026 11:40:45 +1000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20260513-panthor-guard-refactor-v1-2-f2d8c15a97ce@collabora.com> References: <20260513-panthor-guard-refactor-v1-0-f2d8c15a97ce@collabora.com> <20260513-panthor-guard-refactor-v1-2-f2d8c15a97ce@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 Small, clean patch adding three guard variants: ```c DEFINE_GUARD(dma_resv, struct dma_resv *, dma_resv_lock(_T, NULL), dma_resv= _unlock(_T)); DEFINE_GUARD_COND(dma_resv, _intr, dma_resv_lock_interruptible(_T, NULL), != _RET); DEFINE_GUARD_COND(dma_resv, _try, dma_resv_trylock(_T)); ``` The `NULL` context is intentional =E2=80=94 these are for cases where no `w= w_acquire_ctx` is needed. The commit message explains this well. One consid= eration: this goes in `include/linux/dma-resv.h` which is a widely-included= header =E2=80=94 adding `#include ` there is fine since c= leanup.h is already pervasive. This patch touches shared DRM infrastructure= , so it needs acks from Christian K=C3=B6nig and/or the DRM maintainers. --- Generated by Claude Code Patch Reviewer