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: Wed, 01 Apr 2026 07:52:57 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <review-patch3-20260331092023.81616-4-thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260331092023.81616-4-thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>
Patch Review
**Looks good overall.** Using `__UNIQUE_ID` is cleaner than the `__PASTE(__drm_exec_, __LINE__)` approach, and `__maybe_unused` is more idiomatic than `(void)`.
The refactoring into a `__drm_exec_until_all_locked` helper macro is well structured:
```c
#define __drm_exec_until_all_locked(exec, _label)
_label:
for (void * __maybe_unused __drm_exec_retry_ptr; ({
__drm_exec_retry_ptr = &&_label;
drm_exec_cleanup(exec);
});)
```
One nit: the commit message says "althrough" — should be "although".
This also makes the `drm_exec_until_all_locked` macro simpler:
```c
#define drm_exec_until_all_locked(exec)
__drm_exec_until_all_locked(exec, __UNIQUE_ID(drm_exec))
```
Splitting the label generation from the loop logic is a readability improvement.
---
---
Generated by Claude Code Patch Reviewer
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-31 21:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-31 9:20 [PATCH 0/5] drm/exec: drm_exec polishing Thomas Hellström
2026-03-31 9:20 ` [PATCH 1/5] drm/exec: Remove the index parameter from drm_exec_for_each_locked_obj[_reverse] Thomas Hellström
2026-03-31 9:29 ` Christian König
2026-03-31 21:52 ` Claude review: " Claude Code Review Bot
2026-03-31 9:20 ` [PATCH 2/5] drm/msm: Remove abuse of drm_exec internals Thomas Hellström
2026-03-31 9:30 ` Christian König
2026-03-31 9:36 ` Christian König
2026-03-31 19:08 ` Rob Clark
2026-03-31 19:52 ` Thomas Hellström
2026-03-31 20:39 ` Rob Clark
2026-03-31 21:52 ` Claude review: " Claude Code Review Bot
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 9:39 ` Christian König
2026-03-31 11:03 ` Thomas Hellström
2026-03-31 21:52 ` Claude Code Review Bot [this message]
2026-03-31 9:20 ` [PATCH 4/5] drm/exec, drm/xe: Avoid abusing the drm_exec retry pointer Thomas Hellström
2026-03-31 9:44 ` Christian König
2026-03-31 10:13 ` Thomas Hellström
2026-03-31 11:09 ` Thomas Hellström
2026-03-31 11:59 ` Christian König
2026-03-31 21:52 ` Claude review: " Claude Code Review Bot
2026-03-31 9:20 ` [PATCH 5/5] drm/exec, drm/xe, drm/amdgpu: Add an accessor for struct drm_exec::ticket Thomas Hellström
2026-03-31 9:46 ` Christian König
2026-03-31 10:18 ` Thomas Hellström
2026-03-31 21:46 ` kernel test robot
2026-03-31 21:52 ` Claude review: " Claude Code Review Bot
2026-03-31 21:52 ` Claude review: drm/exec: drm_exec polishing 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-patch3-20260331092023.81616-4-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