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/bridge: aux-hpd: let drivers pass IRQ_HPD events Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2026 09:07:43 +1000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20260421-hpd-irq-events-v3-3-44d2bf40dfc2@oss.qualcomm.com> References: <20260421-hpd-irq-events-v3-0-44d2bf40dfc2@oss.qualcomm.com> <20260421-hpd-irq-events-v3-3-44d2bf40dfc2@oss.qualcomm.com> X-Mailer: Claude Code Patch Reviewer Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit MIME-Version: 1.0 Patch Review This renames the core notification functions to `_extra` variants and keeps the old names as inline wrappers. The approach is pragmatic for cross-tree merging. **aux-bridge.h wrapper placement** -- The `drm_aux_hpd_bridge_notify()` inline wrapper is placed outside the `#ifdef CONFIG_DRM_AUX_HPD_BRIDGE` / `#else` blocks but inside the header guard. This works correctly because `drm_aux_hpd_bridge_notify_extra()` is available in both the real and stub forms. **drm_bridge.h wrapper** -- Clean, with proper kerneldoc. **Typo in commit message:** "The drm_aux_hpd_bridge_notify() is **keps** to ease merging" should be "**kept**". **Naming:** The `_extra` suffix is somewhat generic. While I understand this was chosen based on v2 review feedback (Tomi suggested making it more general for future extra status bits), names like `_with_extra_status` or `_extended` might be slightly clearer. But this is a matter of taste and the current naming is acceptable. --- Generated by Claude Code Patch Reviewer