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/vblank: Add DRM_VBLANK_FLAG_SIMULATED Date: Sat, 16 May 2026 09:20:27 +1000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20260515120916.333614-3-tzimmermann@suse.de> References: <20260515120916.333614-1-tzimmermann@suse.de> <20260515120916.333614-3-tzimmermann@suse.de> X-Mailer: Claude Code Patch Reviewer Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit MIME-Version: 1.0 Patch Review Defines the flag and adds the ioctl check. **Main concern:** `DRM_VBLANK_FLAG_SIMULATED` is defined as `BIT(1)`: ```c #define DRM_VBLANK_FLAG_SIMULATED BIT(1) ``` This skips `BIT(0)` with no comment or reserved `BIT(0)` definition. Either start at `BIT(0)` or add a comment explaining what `BIT(0)` is reserved for. As-is, it looks like an accidental off-by-one. The ioctl check itself is well-placed: ```c vblank = drm_vblank_crtc(dev, pipe); if (vblank->flags & DRM_VBLANK_FLAG_SIMULATED) return -EOPNOTSUPP; ``` This is after the pipe validation but before any vblank counter manipulation, which is correct. The `-EOPNOTSUPP` error code is consistent with the existing `drm_wait_vblank_supported()` check at the top of the same function. --- Generated by Claude Code Patch Reviewer