From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Claude Code Review Bot To: dri-devel-reviews@example.com Subject: Claude review: gpu: nova-core: falcon: remove unwarranted safety check in dma_load Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2026 09:15:14 +1000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20260306-turing_prep-v11-7-8f0042c5d026@nvidia.com> References: <20260306-turing_prep-v11-0-8f0042c5d026@nvidia.com> <20260306-turing_prep-v11-7-8f0042c5d026@nvidia.com> X-Mailer: Claude Code Patch Reviewer Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Patch Review **Note: this patch is misordered in the mbox** =E2=80=94 it appears as patc= h 7 but was sent after patch 8 (the mbox has 08/12 before 07/12). The patch= es should still apply correctly since they touch different code, but review= ers may be confused by the ordering. The removal of the `debug_assert!(false)` + `Err(EINVAL)` check is justifie= d =E2=80=94 with PIO support, non-secure IMEM sections can now exist for DM= A-loaded firmwares too, and the check was overly restrictive. The comment w= as also misleading since "those platforms do not use DMA" is now a detail o= f the load method selection, not a firmware property constraint. No issues with the code change. --- Generated by Claude Code Patch Reviewer