From: Claude Code Review Bot <claude-review@example.com>
To: dri-devel-reviews@example.com
Subject: Claude review: drm/exec: Make the drm_exec_until_all_locked() macro more readable
Date: Mon, 25 May 2026 21:59:35 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <review-patch2-20260520101616.41284-3-thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260520101616.41284-3-thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
Patch Review
**Assessment: Good.**
```c
#define __drm_exec_until_all_locked(exec, _label) \
_label: \
for (void *const __maybe_unused __drm_exec_retry_ptr = &&_label; \
drm_exec_cleanup(exec);)
```
Three improvements here:
1. `__UNIQUE_ID` for the label name instead of `__PASTE(__drm_exec_, __LINE__)` — consistent with patch 1 and standard kernel idiom.
2. `__maybe_unused` instead of `(void)__drm_exec_retry_ptr` cast — cleaner.
3. `void *const` — prevents accidental reassignment of the jump target.
Note that `__drm_exec_retry_ptr` itself is deliberately *not* uniquified, since `drm_exec_retry_on_contention()` (and the new `drm_exec_retry()` from patch 3) reference it by name. This is the correct design — the variable name forms the contract between the loop macro and the retry macros.
One minor observation: the comment block is moved from the `drm_exec_until_all_locked` kdoc to the helper, which is appropriate since the implementation detail about label scoping belongs with the helper.
---
Generated by Claude Code Patch Reviewer
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-25 11:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-20 10:16 [PATCH v2 0/4] drm/exec: drm_exec polishing Thomas Hellström
2026-05-20 10:16 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] drm/exec: Remove the index parameter from drm_exec_for_each_locked_obj[_reverse] Thomas Hellström
2026-05-20 11:32 ` Christian König
2026-05-25 11:59 ` Claude review: " Claude Code Review Bot
2026-05-20 10:16 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] drm/exec: Make the drm_exec_until_all_locked() macro more readable Thomas Hellström
2026-05-20 11:35 ` Christian König
2026-05-25 11:59 ` Claude Code Review Bot [this message]
2026-05-20 10:16 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] drm/exec, drm/xe: Avoid abusing the drm_exec retry pointer Thomas Hellström
2026-05-20 11:39 ` Christian König
2026-05-25 11:59 ` Claude review: " Claude Code Review Bot
2026-05-20 10:16 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] drm/exec, drm/xe, drm/amdgpu: Add an accessor for struct drm_exec::ticket Thomas Hellström
2026-05-20 11:42 ` Christian König
2026-05-25 11:59 ` Claude review: " Claude Code Review Bot
2026-05-20 11:34 ` [PATCH v2 0/4] drm/exec: drm_exec polishing Christian König
2026-05-21 11:45 ` Thomas Hellström
2026-05-25 11:59 ` Claude review: " Claude Code Review Bot
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2026-03-31 9:20 [PATCH 0/5] " Thomas Hellström
2026-03-31 9:20 ` [PATCH 3/5] drm/exec: Make the drm_exec_until_all_locked() macro more readable Thomas Hellström
2026-03-31 21:52 ` 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-patch2-20260520101616.41284-3-thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.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