From: Claude Code Review Bot <claude-review@example.com>
To: dri-devel-reviews@example.com
Subject: Claude review: drm/imagination: Rename FW booted to FW initialised
Date: Sat, 16 May 2026 14:11:25 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <review-patch3-20260512-b4-context_reset-v1-3-439bee96ed83@imgtec.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260512-b4-context_reset-v1-3-439bee96ed83@imgtec.com>
Patch Review
**Verdict: Build breakage**
This patch is described as a pure rename (`booted` → `initialised`) but it silently changes function call arguments in `pvr_power.c`, creating a **compile error**.
In `pvr_power_device_suspend()`, the diff changes:
```c
- err = pvr_power_fw_disable(pvr_dev, false, true);
+ err = pvr_power_fw_disable(pvr_dev, false);
```
In `pvr_power_device_resume()`:
```c
- err = pvr_power_fw_enable(pvr_dev, true);
+ err = pvr_power_fw_enable(pvr_dev);
```
But the function signatures are *not* updated:
```c
pvr_power_fw_disable(struct pvr_device *pvr_dev, bool hard_reset, bool rpm_suspend) // 3 params
pvr_power_fw_enable(struct pvr_device *pvr_dev, bool rpm_resume) // 2 params
```
And other call sites in `pvr_power_reset()` still use the original argument count:
```c
err = pvr_power_fw_disable(pvr_dev, hard_reset, false); // 3 args
err = pvr_power_fw_enable(pvr_dev, false); // 2 args
```
This means the patch will fail to compile. It looks like the patch was generated against a different tree where `pvr_power_fw_disable`/`pvr_power_fw_enable` already had reduced parameter lists, or unrelated changes were accidentally folded in.
**Fix:** Either keep the original argument counts (just do the `booted` → `initialised` rename), or include the function signature changes and update all call sites consistently. If the intent is to remove the `rpm_suspend`/`rpm_resume` parameters entirely, that should be a separate patch with its own justification.
---
Generated by Claude Code Patch Reviewer
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-16 4:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-12 6:47 [PATCH 0/4] drm/imagination: Multiple enhancement Brajesh Gupta
2026-05-12 6:47 ` [PATCH 1/4] drm/imagination: Populate FW common context ID before passing to the FW Brajesh Gupta
2026-05-16 4:11 ` Claude review: " Claude Code Review Bot
2026-05-12 6:47 ` [PATCH 2/4] drm/imagination: Don't timeout job if its fence has been signaled Brajesh Gupta
2026-05-16 4:11 ` Claude review: " Claude Code Review Bot
2026-05-12 6:47 ` [PATCH 3/4] drm/imagination: Rename FW booted to FW initialised Brajesh Gupta
2026-05-16 4:11 ` Claude Code Review Bot [this message]
2026-05-12 6:47 ` [PATCH 4/4] drm/imagination: Access FW initialised state with READ/WRITE_ONCE Brajesh Gupta
2026-05-16 4:11 ` Claude review: " Claude Code Review Bot
2026-05-16 4:11 ` Claude review: drm/imagination: Multiple enhancement 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-patch3-20260512-b4-context_reset-v1-3-439bee96ed83@imgtec.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