From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Claude Code Review Bot To: dri-devel-reviews@example.com Subject: Claude review: nouveau/gsp: Cleanup IS_ERR_OR_NULL in nvkm_gsp_rpc_rd() Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2026 14:22:54 +1000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20260601095403.228220-6-zenghongling@kylinos.cn> References: <20260601095403.228220-1-zenghongling@kylinos.cn> <20260601095403.228220-6-zenghongling@kylinos.cn> X-Mailer: Claude Code Patch Reviewer Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Patch Review **Already applied on drm-next.** The change to the `nvkm_gsp_rpc_get()` che= ck is correct for the same reason. The commit message notes that `nvkm_gsp_rpc_push()` can return NULL for NOW= AIT/NOSEQ policies but `nvkm_gsp_rpc_rd()` uses RECV policy. This analysis = is correct =E2=80=94 the existing `IS_ERR_OR_NULL` was overly cautious for = the `rpc_get` call, and the subsequent `rpc_push` with RECV policy should n= ot return NULL either (RECV goes through `r535_gsp_msg_recv` with non-zero = `gsp_rpc_len` and non-zero `fn`, which only returns NULL when `gsp_rpc_len = =3D=3D 0`). --- **Summary:** Patches 2-5 are already in drm-next and are correct. Patch 1 h= as a misplaced doc comment (documenting `r535_gsp_rpc_get` but attached to = `r535_gsp_rpc_done`). The promised `Fixes:` tags are absent from all patche= s. --- Generated by Claude Code Patch Reviewer