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/panel-edp: Modify panel name and delay for CMN 0x14d6 Date: Thu, 07 May 2026 13:22:16 +1000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20260506170607.10813-5-terry_hsiao@compal.corp-partner.google.com> References: <20260506170607.10813-1-terry_hsiao@compal.corp-partner.google.com> <20260506170607.10813-5-terry_hsiao@compal.corp-partner.google.com> X-Mailer: Claude Code Patch Reviewer Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit MIME-Version: 1.0 Patch Review **Needs more justification.** This patch changes the existing CMN 0x14d6 entry: ```c - EDP_PANEL_ENTRY('C', 'M', 'N', 0x14d6, &delay_200_500_e80_d50, "N140BGA-EA4"), + EDP_PANEL_ENTRY('C', 'M', 'N', 0x14d6, &delay_200_500_e80, "N140BGA-E54"), ``` **Name correction is validated:** The existing table already has "N140BGA-EA4" at product ID 0x142e (line 2064), confirming that 0x14d6 is a *different* panel and the original name was incorrect. The corrected name "N140BGA-E54" makes sense. **Delay change needs explanation:** Changing from `delay_200_500_e80_d50` to `delay_200_500_e80` removes the 50ms disable delay. The commit message says "adjust its delay configuration" but doesn't explain *why* the disable delay was wrong or what testing confirmed the new value is safe. This is a behavioral change for existing users of this panel. Was the d50 causing a visible artifact on power-off? Was it measured against the panel datasheet? The commit message should include this rationale so maintainers and future readers understand the change isn't just cosmetic. --- Generated by Claude Code Patch Reviewer