Re: [PATCH 4/5] drm/i915/dp_tunnel: Sanitize documentation of intel_dp_tunnel_detect()

[Imre Deak <imre.deak@intel.com>]

On Tue, Feb 24, 2026 at 04:36:41AM +0200, Murthy, Arun R wrote:
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Deak, Imre <imre.deak@intel.com>
> > Sent: Monday, February 23, 2026 10:15 PM
> > To: Murthy, Arun R <arun.r.murthy@intel.com>
> > Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] drm/i915/dp_tunnel: Sanitize documentation of
> > intel_dp_tunnel_detect()
> > 
> > On Mon, Feb 23, 2026 at 06:12:23PM +0200, Murthy, Arun R wrote:
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Intel-gfx <intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org> On Behalf
> > > > Of Imre Deak
> > > > Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2026 11:58 PM
> > > > To: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org; intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org
> > > > Subject: [PATCH 4/5] drm/i915/dp_tunnel: Sanitize documentation of
> > > > intel_dp_tunnel_detect()
> > > >
> > > > Clarify the documentation of detect_new_tunnel() return values,
> > > > including the failure case.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Can this change be merged with the previous patch as the previous
> > > patch makes this change.
> > 
> > There is no functional change. This patch merely clarifies the formatting of the
> > return value documentation and documents the failure case, which was already
> > possible before this patchset. Therefore, I think this is a separate change that
> > should be submitted as a separate patch.
> > 
> This change in the return value was introduced in the previous patch,
> so updating the function header documentation  in the same patch would
> be better.

There is no change in the return value of the function, either in the
previous patch or in any other patch of the patchset; the function's
return value remains the same as it was before the patchset, this change
only clarifies the function documentation.

> Thanks and Regards,
> Arun R Murthy
> --------------------
> > > Thanks and Regards,
> > > Arun R Murthy
> > > -------------------
> > > > Signed-off-by: Imre Deak <imre.deak@intel.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_tunnel.c | 9 ++++++---
> > > >  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_tunnel.c
> > > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_tunnel.c
> > > > index 5840b92dace19..1c552a7091897 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_tunnel.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_tunnel.c
> > > > @@ -241,9 +241,12 @@ static int detect_new_tunnel(struct intel_dp
> > > > *intel_dp, struct drm_modeset_acqui
> > > >   * tunnel. If the tunnel's state change requires this - for instance the
> > > >   * tunnel's group ID has changed - the tunnel will be dropped and
> > recreated.
> > > >   *
> > > > - * Return 0 in case of success - after any tunnel detected and
> > > > added to
> > > > - * @intel_dp - 1 in case the BW on an already existing tunnel has
> > > > changed in a
> > > > - * way that requires notifying user space.
> > > > + * Returns:
> > > > + * - 0 in case of success - after any tunnel detected and added to
> > > > + @intel_dp
> > > > + * - 1 in case the link BW via the new or an already existing
> > > > + tunnel has
> > > > changed
> > > > + *   in a way that requires notifying user space
> > > > + * - Negative error code, if creating a new tunnel or updating the tunnel
> > > > + *   state failed
> > > >   */
> > > >  int intel_dp_tunnel_detect(struct intel_dp *intel_dp, struct
> > > > drm_modeset_acquire_ctx *ctx)  {
> > > > --
> > > > 2.49.1
> > >